Good morning! Glad you stopped by. I hope you are persevering in your "Year of the Bible" readings. I think we're getting into some good stuff this week. But before I get into that, let's get the Q&A out of the way.
Here's the question and answer from Tuesday:
What did Nehemiah do to ensure that no load could be brought in on the Sabbath day? (Nehemiah 13)
Nehemiah 13:19 19 When evening shadows fell on the gates of Jerusalem before the Sabbath, I ordered the doors to be shut and not opened until the Sabbath was over. I stationed some of my own men at the gates so that no load could be brought in on the Sabbath day.
And the question and answer from yesterday:
Xerxes displayed his vast wealth for 180 days. How long did the banquet last? (Esther 1)
Esther 1:5 5 When these days were over, the king gave a banquet, lasting seven days, in the enclosed garden of the king's palace, for all the people from the least to the greatest, who were in the citadel of Susa.
And here's the question of the day:
There was a crowd around Jesus when he drove the demon out of the man who was mute. By whose power did some of the crowd think Jesus healed? (Luke 11)
And here's the reflection of the day:
I have to confess something. . . I'm a bit enthralled with the Esther story. At Bible Study yesterday, I made us read the WHOLE book out loud. (It was actually pretty great. I recommend it to everyone to just read it straight through.) My next door neighbor extraordinaire loaned me movie version of the story. (Which I promptly watched when I got home from Bible Study. I'm considering watching it again before I give it back!) And now I'm planning on, by hook or by crook, we're going to get the whole story on Sunday morning too. (I have specially commissioned some drawings from my brother the artist.)
It's a great story! Intrigue. Romance. Heroes and villains. Good versus evil. What more could you ask for?
Esther was written during the Diaspora, the time when the Jews had been exiled from Jerusalem for a second time, this time at the hands of Babylon. Esther is a story meant to rally the troops, to bolster the spirits of the Jews who feared they might never return home again.
So isn't it ironic (don't you think) that God's name does not appear in this text. Does it mean God is not present simply because His name does not appear on the pages? By no means! How can a book be written to assure and encouragement people in their faith without mentioning God?Such a book must be written very cleverly. And the reader must be very discerning as well.
Where are the points where God is clearly present and in control though His name is absent int today's "Year of the Bible" readings? That was one of the things we tried to keep track of as we read through it in Bible Study. I think if you read closely enough, you will be able to pick out many places where God does "appear" in the story.
When we read the story of Esther, we have to keep our eyes peeled looking for God hiding in the story. Kind of like our lives: we have to keep our eyes peeled to look for God who lingers in each scene in our lives!
Happy reading!
Allison
Showing posts with label narrative. Show all posts
Showing posts with label narrative. Show all posts
Thursday, July 16, 2009
Friday, June 26, 2009
Don't Believe Your Own Hype!
Good morning! (Or afternoon or evening, depending on when you're reading this.) I hope you're enjoying the read through 2 Chronicles a little more than 1 Chronicles--many more little narratives and a lot fewer lists.
I also hope you're keeping up with "My Book of Chronicles" too! I was so glad to hear how many people were willing to share where they see God at work in their lives during worship on Sunday. (For those of you who missed it: two Sundays ago, I preached on 1 Chronicles 5. I talked about how 1 Chronicles was the story of a family's faith and witness of seeing God at work in the everyday, mundane details of their lives, which is why the Chronicles were so precious to their descendants. So I handed out little notebooks to those who were there and encouraged them to write down where they saw God at work in their lives; hence, their own "book of Chronicles" which could be handed down through the generations of THEIR family.)
Here's the question and answer from yesterday:
What does Paul ask the Christians at Ephesus to do? (Eph 3)
Ephesians 3:13 13 I ask you, therefore, not to be discouraged because of my sufferings for you, which are your glory. I belatedly realized this is a reading from Wednesday's schedule, not Thursday. Sorry!
And here's the question of the day:
What did Athaliah, the mother of Ahaziah, do when she learned her son had died? (2 Chron 22)
And here's the reflection of the day:
2 Chronicles 24 has an interesting little story for us today. "Joash was seven years old when he became king, and he reigned in Jerusalem forty years."
Sheesh, seven years old. How many of you parents barely allow your seven-year-old to pick out his or her own clothes, let alone rule over Israel?! But that's the way it goes with passing down the kingship through lineage. It is just one of the tragic results of a life, for better or worse, cut short.
Fortunately, Joash had Jehoiada. We have read much about Jehoiada in the last couple chapters of 2 Chronicles, so we know he was a no-nonsense kind of guy, clearly anointed by the Lord for leadership over his people. For forty long years, Joash did "what was right in the eyes of the Lord all the years of Jehoiada the priest" (v2). Isn't that a little different than what we're used to reading about these kings--usually it says they did "what was right in the eyes of the Lord" period. There's not usually an end limit on their obedience; generally they are obedient all of their lives.
The text doesn't tell us exactly what went wrong, but my guess is that Joash believed his own hype. It does tells us, "After the death of Jehoiada, the officials of Judah came and paid homage to the king, and he listened to them" (v17). Maybe Joash started to believe his own hype.
And it all went downhill from there. Joash seems to have forgotten all that Jehoiada had done for him and taught him. He was one who guided Joash, acting as a direct connection between the king and God. Jehoiada was probably also the one who kept Joash's ego under control. Once that presence was gone, things fell apart.
The moral of the story? Be careful of the company you keep. Surround yourself with people who will give you sage advice, who will keep you accountable, and will help you not believe your own hype!
Have a splendid day!
Allison
I also hope you're keeping up with "My Book of Chronicles" too! I was so glad to hear how many people were willing to share where they see God at work in their lives during worship on Sunday. (For those of you who missed it: two Sundays ago, I preached on 1 Chronicles 5. I talked about how 1 Chronicles was the story of a family's faith and witness of seeing God at work in the everyday, mundane details of their lives, which is why the Chronicles were so precious to their descendants. So I handed out little notebooks to those who were there and encouraged them to write down where they saw God at work in their lives; hence, their own "book of Chronicles" which could be handed down through the generations of THEIR family.)
Here's the question and answer from yesterday:
What does Paul ask the Christians at Ephesus to do? (Eph 3)
Ephesians 3:13 13 I ask you, therefore, not to be discouraged because of my sufferings for you, which are your glory. I belatedly realized this is a reading from Wednesday's schedule, not Thursday. Sorry!
And here's the question of the day:
What did Athaliah, the mother of Ahaziah, do when she learned her son had died? (2 Chron 22)
And here's the reflection of the day:
2 Chronicles 24 has an interesting little story for us today. "Joash was seven years old when he became king, and he reigned in Jerusalem forty years."
Sheesh, seven years old. How many of you parents barely allow your seven-year-old to pick out his or her own clothes, let alone rule over Israel?! But that's the way it goes with passing down the kingship through lineage. It is just one of the tragic results of a life, for better or worse, cut short.
Fortunately, Joash had Jehoiada. We have read much about Jehoiada in the last couple chapters of 2 Chronicles, so we know he was a no-nonsense kind of guy, clearly anointed by the Lord for leadership over his people. For forty long years, Joash did "what was right in the eyes of the Lord all the years of Jehoiada the priest" (v2). Isn't that a little different than what we're used to reading about these kings--usually it says they did "what was right in the eyes of the Lord" period. There's not usually an end limit on their obedience; generally they are obedient all of their lives.
The text doesn't tell us exactly what went wrong, but my guess is that Joash believed his own hype. It does tells us, "After the death of Jehoiada, the officials of Judah came and paid homage to the king, and he listened to them" (v17). Maybe Joash started to believe his own hype.
And it all went downhill from there. Joash seems to have forgotten all that Jehoiada had done for him and taught him. He was one who guided Joash, acting as a direct connection between the king and God. Jehoiada was probably also the one who kept Joash's ego under control. Once that presence was gone, things fell apart.
The moral of the story? Be careful of the company you keep. Surround yourself with people who will give you sage advice, who will keep you accountable, and will help you not believe your own hype!
Have a splendid day!
Allison
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
Sleeping with the Enemy
Good morning! Boy, I'm glad I turned the furnace back on last night--it was chilly. For those of you who are gardeners, I hope your plants survived the cold! Let's get down to business.
Here's the question and answer from yesterday:
Monday: Why did Hiram, King of Tyre, send envoys to Solomon? (I Kings 5)
1 Kings 5:1 When Hiram king of Tyre heard that Solomon had been anointed king to succeed his father David, he sent his envoys to Solomon, because he had always been on friendly terms with David.
And here's the question of the day:
Tuesday: Which came first: the palace or the temple? (I Kings 6-7)
And here's the reflection of the day:
Today's readings from 1 Kings 6-7 provide us with a few interesting little tidbits of information.
For example, check out verse 1 in 1 Kings 6: "In the four hundred and eightieth year after the Israelites had come out of Egypt . . . " It is common for passages of Scripture to start with some "sign posts" to help clue people in on the time and place of the story. And Israel's history always dates back to their liberation from Egypt by the hand of God. Even though Solomon is king 10-12 generations AFTER the exodus, it is still fresh in the mind of the authors of 1 Kings. After all this time, they still "remember" what their ancestors went through at the hands of Pharaoh in Egypt.
Now, look at verse 8 in 1 Kings 7: "And the palace in which he was to live, set farther back, was similar in design. Solomon also made a palace like this hall for Pharaoh's daughter, whom he had married." It's just a little narrative detail in the midst of two grand chapters describing the temple and the palace, but it's an important detail: THE KING OF ISRAEL MARRIED THE DAUGHTER OF EGYPT'S PHARAOH!
It doesn't get more shocking than that does it? One might try to justify this as a diplomatic marriage, but come on . . . really? (said like Amy Pohler and Seth Myers on SNL!) Does this seem like a wise move, o great and wise Solomon??
Never has God been a fan of Israel "marrying outside the faith." The Israelites was always forbidden from marrying foreigners not because they're foreigners, but because they do not worship Yahweh, Israel's God. God wants to preserve Israel's faith and way of life as a community, which is no easy task . . . a task made all the more difficult when Israel's leader is literally sleeping with the enemy.
In the midst of all these grand details of the palace and the temple (don't these 2 chapters sounds like someone describing what a museum looks like?), God interrupts, like God so often does. In 1 Kings 6:11ff, "The word of the LORD came to Solomon: 12 "As for this temple you are building, if you follow my decrees, carry out my regulations and keep all my commands and obey them, I will fulfill through you the promise I gave to David your father. 13 And I will live among the Israelites and will not abandon my people Israel." 14 So Solomon built the temple and completed it.
In other words, God says, "Using this temple, if you will follow my decrees. . . I will live among the Israelites and will not abandon my people Israel." Everything hinges on the temple and Solomon's wise obedience to God's decrees. It's that important; hence all the description and detail that goes along with it.
This "little" disobedience I mentioned earlier may be a foreshadowing of things to come for Solomon and the Israelites. You'll just have to keep reading to find out what happens next!!
Have a splendid day!
Allison
Here's the question and answer from yesterday:
Monday: Why did Hiram, King of Tyre, send envoys to Solomon? (I Kings 5)
1 Kings 5:1 When Hiram king of Tyre heard that Solomon had been anointed king to succeed his father David, he sent his envoys to Solomon, because he had always been on friendly terms with David.
And here's the question of the day:
Tuesday: Which came first: the palace or the temple? (I Kings 6-7)
And here's the reflection of the day:
Today's readings from 1 Kings 6-7 provide us with a few interesting little tidbits of information.
For example, check out verse 1 in 1 Kings 6: "In the four hundred and eightieth year after the Israelites had come out of Egypt . . . " It is common for passages of Scripture to start with some "sign posts" to help clue people in on the time and place of the story. And Israel's history always dates back to their liberation from Egypt by the hand of God. Even though Solomon is king 10-12 generations AFTER the exodus, it is still fresh in the mind of the authors of 1 Kings. After all this time, they still "remember" what their ancestors went through at the hands of Pharaoh in Egypt.
Now, look at verse 8 in 1 Kings 7: "And the palace in which he was to live, set farther back, was similar in design. Solomon also made a palace like this hall for Pharaoh's daughter, whom he had married." It's just a little narrative detail in the midst of two grand chapters describing the temple and the palace, but it's an important detail: THE KING OF ISRAEL MARRIED THE DAUGHTER OF EGYPT'S PHARAOH!
It doesn't get more shocking than that does it? One might try to justify this as a diplomatic marriage, but come on . . . really? (said like Amy Pohler and Seth Myers on SNL!) Does this seem like a wise move, o great and wise Solomon??
Never has God been a fan of Israel "marrying outside the faith." The Israelites was always forbidden from marrying foreigners not because they're foreigners, but because they do not worship Yahweh, Israel's God. God wants to preserve Israel's faith and way of life as a community, which is no easy task . . . a task made all the more difficult when Israel's leader is literally sleeping with the enemy.
In the midst of all these grand details of the palace and the temple (don't these 2 chapters sounds like someone describing what a museum looks like?), God interrupts, like God so often does. In 1 Kings 6:11ff, "The word of the LORD came to Solomon: 12 "As for this temple you are building, if you follow my decrees, carry out my regulations and keep all my commands and obey them, I will fulfill through you the promise I gave to David your father. 13 And I will live among the Israelites and will not abandon my people Israel." 14 So Solomon built the temple and completed it.
In other words, God says, "Using this temple, if you will follow my decrees. . . I will live among the Israelites and will not abandon my people Israel." Everything hinges on the temple and Solomon's wise obedience to God's decrees. It's that important; hence all the description and detail that goes along with it.
This "little" disobedience I mentioned earlier may be a foreshadowing of things to come for Solomon and the Israelites. You'll just have to keep reading to find out what happens next!!
Have a splendid day!
Allison
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Mark's Big Secret
Hello! I hoped you had a blessed Resurrection Sunday! Let's not waste any time. Since I took a little sabbath from blogging yesterday, I'll catch you up on all the qs and as. . .
Here's the question and answer from Sunday:
Sun, Apr 12 Who does the angel of the Lord appear to in Judges 6?
Judges 6:11 The angel of the LORD came and sat down under the oak in Ophrah that belonged to Joash the Abiezrite, where his son Gideon was threshing wheat in a winepress to keep it from the Midianites.
Here's the question and answer from Monday:
Mon, Apr 13 At whose house does Jesus have dinner with many tax collectors and sinners? (Mark 2)
Mark 2:15 15 While Jesus was having dinner at Levi's house, many tax collectors and "sinners" were eating with him and his disciples, for there were many who followed him.
And here's the question of the day:
Tues, Apr 14 What did God do when the Israelites disobeyed him? (Judges 10)
And here's the reflection of the day:
Mark has a big secret in Mark 3. Well, that's not wholly true. It's Jesus who has the secret, but it doesn't seem to be much of a secret. In fact, demons and spirits keep blurting it out whenever Jesus comes near. Jesus quickly shushes them, giving "them strict orders not to tell who he was."
The secret is just what the evil spirits claim: "You are the Son of God." Which is totally true and EXACTLY what Jesus is trying to convince the disciples of! So, why keep it a secret? Especially now, when all the crowds are eagerly following him, straining and pushing to get closer to his healing power. The stage is set for the big revelation. But Jesus continues to shush them.
Students and scholars of Mark call this the "messianic secret." Mark, as a gospel writer, likes to communicate on two levels: at the narrative level, "characters in the story interact within an assumed framework of relationships, attitudes, and knowledge that becomes evident as the plot unfolds" (Lamar Williamson, Jr, Mark, Interpretation Commentary series).
The second level is the interaction between the writer and the READER--that's us. For example, Mark 1:1 says, "The beginning of the gospel about Jesus Christ, the Son of God." So, the reader knows who Jesus is, but it has not yet been revealed to the disciples and followers of Jesus Christ. In this level of communication, Mark enjoys using ambiguity, irony, paradox and lots of other literary devices we English majors love but drive others crazy!
So, this "messianic secret" is a little bit of irony (that is, the demons knowing who Jesus is even when the disciples don't). For Mark, Jesus cannot truly be known outside of the context of his passion, death, and resurrection, which Mark has gotten to yet. So to reveal Jesus' identity before he tells the whole story is do jump to the punchline before you've finished setting up the joke.
This "messianic" secret will keep popping up throughout the book. Keep your eyes peeled for those. Also, be on the lookout for other clues pointing toward Jesus' Passion, death, and resurrection. Mark drops a lot of hints along the way; we just have to notice them. (For example, Mark 3:6 says, "Then the Pharisees went out and began to plot with the Herodians how they might kill Jesus.")
So, is this a secret to keep or a secret to share? Perhaps that is the greatest irony of all--this is a secret Jesus wants us to share with everyone!!
Allison
Here's the question and answer from Sunday:
Sun, Apr 12 Who does the angel of the Lord appear to in Judges 6?
Judges 6:11 The angel of the LORD came and sat down under the oak in Ophrah that belonged to Joash the Abiezrite, where his son Gideon was threshing wheat in a winepress to keep it from the Midianites.
Here's the question and answer from Monday:
Mon, Apr 13 At whose house does Jesus have dinner with many tax collectors and sinners? (Mark 2)
Mark 2:15 15 While Jesus was having dinner at Levi's house, many tax collectors and "sinners" were eating with him and his disciples, for there were many who followed him.
And here's the question of the day:
Tues, Apr 14 What did God do when the Israelites disobeyed him? (Judges 10)
And here's the reflection of the day:
Mark has a big secret in Mark 3. Well, that's not wholly true. It's Jesus who has the secret, but it doesn't seem to be much of a secret. In fact, demons and spirits keep blurting it out whenever Jesus comes near. Jesus quickly shushes them, giving "them strict orders not to tell who he was."
The secret is just what the evil spirits claim: "You are the Son of God." Which is totally true and EXACTLY what Jesus is trying to convince the disciples of! So, why keep it a secret? Especially now, when all the crowds are eagerly following him, straining and pushing to get closer to his healing power. The stage is set for the big revelation. But Jesus continues to shush them.
Students and scholars of Mark call this the "messianic secret." Mark, as a gospel writer, likes to communicate on two levels: at the narrative level, "characters in the story interact within an assumed framework of relationships, attitudes, and knowledge that becomes evident as the plot unfolds" (Lamar Williamson, Jr, Mark, Interpretation Commentary series).
The second level is the interaction between the writer and the READER--that's us. For example, Mark 1:1 says, "The beginning of the gospel about Jesus Christ, the Son of God." So, the reader knows who Jesus is, but it has not yet been revealed to the disciples and followers of Jesus Christ. In this level of communication, Mark enjoys using ambiguity, irony, paradox and lots of other literary devices we English majors love but drive others crazy!
So, this "messianic secret" is a little bit of irony (that is, the demons knowing who Jesus is even when the disciples don't). For Mark, Jesus cannot truly be known outside of the context of his passion, death, and resurrection, which Mark has gotten to yet. So to reveal Jesus' identity before he tells the whole story is do jump to the punchline before you've finished setting up the joke.
This "messianic" secret will keep popping up throughout the book. Keep your eyes peeled for those. Also, be on the lookout for other clues pointing toward Jesus' Passion, death, and resurrection. Mark drops a lot of hints along the way; we just have to notice them. (For example, Mark 3:6 says, "Then the Pharisees went out and began to plot with the Herodians how they might kill Jesus.")
So, is this a secret to keep or a secret to share? Perhaps that is the greatest irony of all--this is a secret Jesus wants us to share with everyone!!
Allison
Thursday, March 19, 2009
"Now we've come. . . to the end of the road. . . "
Oh, Boyz-2-Men, how I loved thee, back in the day.
Well, we've come to the end of the road in Acts. It's kind of disappointing, don't you think? I love hearing about the missionary journeys that Paul takes and the situations he encounters along the way. But Romans is right around the corner and that is another fascinating book of the Bible to read.
But, first things first. . .
Here's the question and answer from yesterday:
Wed, Mar 18: Based on Psalm 33, what do you think it means to fear the Lord?
There's not necessarily a write or wrong answer, but according to the Psalm, to "fear" God is to revere and to love:
Psalm 33:8 8 Let all the earth fear the LORD; let all the people of the world revere him.
Psalm 33:20 20 We wait in hope for the LORD; he is our help and our shield. 21 In him our hearts rejoice, for we trust in his holy name. 22 May your unfailing love rest upon us, O LORD, even as we put our hope in you.
And here's the question of the day:
Thur, Mar 19: Why did the people on the island of Malta think Paul was a god? (Acts 28)
And here's the reflection of the day:
We've reached the end of the road in Acts. Seems an apt way to phrase that--Acts is full of roads Paul walked along and seas across which Paul sailed. He went so many places, preached to so many people, and he healed so many diseased-ridden bodies.
How could Luke possibly end this tremendous story? What could possibly be the ending of such a tremendous journey? It if were a movie today, there would be fireworks and standing ovations and a ship sailing off into the sunset with Paul at the helm, sailing for a tropical island where everyone was a believer and there was no more evangelizing to be done because he had done it all.
But that's not Luke's style. We think the story of the legendary Paul deserves a Hollywood ending. But Luke knows that would simply distract from the story--the story of God.
Robert Wall included this as the conclusion to his commentary on Acts:
Paul “welcomed all who came to him, proclaiming the kingdom of God . . . with all boldness” (28:30-31 NRSV). The final sentence of Acts is a summary, not a climax. Paul is simply being Paul, ever faithful to his prophetic vocation. But this is Luke’s point. His conclusion does not intend to contribute new information to his biography of Paul or to frustrate his readers by leaving out important information.
The ending to Acts does what good endings to excellent stories must always do: facilitate a transition that moves readers from the narrative world to their own considerably more complicated real worlds. These parting images of Paul linger on in our collective imagination to stimulate further reflection on what it means to continue what Paul began to do and to say in Rome. We are his successors. While times and places will continue to change, the church’s prophetic calling is to “proclaim the kingdom of God and teach about the Lord Jesus Christ with all boldness.” The church must simply be the church.
What do you think of this? Tell me!
Allison
Well, we've come to the end of the road in Acts. It's kind of disappointing, don't you think? I love hearing about the missionary journeys that Paul takes and the situations he encounters along the way. But Romans is right around the corner and that is another fascinating book of the Bible to read.
But, first things first. . .
Here's the question and answer from yesterday:
Wed, Mar 18: Based on Psalm 33, what do you think it means to fear the Lord?
There's not necessarily a write or wrong answer, but according to the Psalm, to "fear" God is to revere and to love:
Psalm 33:8 8 Let all the earth fear the LORD; let all the people of the world revere him.
Psalm 33:20 20 We wait in hope for the LORD; he is our help and our shield. 21 In him our hearts rejoice, for we trust in his holy name. 22 May your unfailing love rest upon us, O LORD, even as we put our hope in you.
And here's the question of the day:
Thur, Mar 19: Why did the people on the island of Malta think Paul was a god? (Acts 28)
And here's the reflection of the day:
We've reached the end of the road in Acts. Seems an apt way to phrase that--Acts is full of roads Paul walked along and seas across which Paul sailed. He went so many places, preached to so many people, and he healed so many diseased-ridden bodies.
How could Luke possibly end this tremendous story? What could possibly be the ending of such a tremendous journey? It if were a movie today, there would be fireworks and standing ovations and a ship sailing off into the sunset with Paul at the helm, sailing for a tropical island where everyone was a believer and there was no more evangelizing to be done because he had done it all.
But that's not Luke's style. We think the story of the legendary Paul deserves a Hollywood ending. But Luke knows that would simply distract from the story--the story of God.
Robert Wall included this as the conclusion to his commentary on Acts:
Paul “welcomed all who came to him, proclaiming the kingdom of God . . . with all boldness” (28:30-31 NRSV). The final sentence of Acts is a summary, not a climax. Paul is simply being Paul, ever faithful to his prophetic vocation. But this is Luke’s point. His conclusion does not intend to contribute new information to his biography of Paul or to frustrate his readers by leaving out important information.
The ending to Acts does what good endings to excellent stories must always do: facilitate a transition that moves readers from the narrative world to their own considerably more complicated real worlds. These parting images of Paul linger on in our collective imagination to stimulate further reflection on what it means to continue what Paul began to do and to say in Rome. We are his successors. While times and places will continue to change, the church’s prophetic calling is to “proclaim the kingdom of God and teach about the Lord Jesus Christ with all boldness.” The church must simply be the church.
What do you think of this? Tell me!
Allison
Monday, March 16, 2009
(Brief!) Intro to Deuteronomy
Hello, again! I thought that since we're starting Deuteronomy, I'd provide a little introduction to the book for you. But first, here are the questions and answers I know you're waiting for.
Here's the question and answer from yesterday:
Sun, March 15: God tells Moses that he will not enter the Promised Land, but his assistant will. Who is his assistant? (Deut 1)
Deuteronomy 1:37-38 37 Because of you the LORD became angry with me also and said, "You shall not enter it, either. 38 But your assistant, Joshua son of Nun, will enter it. Encourage him, because he will lead Israel to inherit it.
And here's the question of the day:
Mon, Mar 16: Whose descendants live in Seir? (Dt 2)
And here's the reflection of the day:
**Before I go any further, I want to attribute the following information to Ronald Clements, author of the Deuteronomy section of the NIB Commentary. (I don't know what I would do without my shelves of commentaries when it comes to this blog!)
Clements writes that Deuteronomy is the fifth and final book of the "books of Moses," otherwise known as the Pentateuch. These five books are the foundation of the whole Old Testament. These books "provide the basis for the heirs of Abraham, who are also viewed as persons bound in covenant to the Lord God, through the revelation given to Moses on Mt. Sinai (Horeb), to govern their lives as the people of God." After all, that's what God's law is all about, right?
The word "Deuteronomy" means "second law." This is a proper title for this book because it describes it the giving again of the law given to Moses on Mt. Sinai in Exodus; in Deuteronomy, it's "the law given by Moses in the plains of Moab immediately prior to the crossing of the river Jordan and Israel's entry" into the Promised Land.
But Deuteronomy is more than just a book of law (Dt 5; 20). There are also sections of narrative (chap 1-3) that summarize the story of Israel's life in the wilderness. It also has series of exhortations and warnings (chap 6-11), blessings and curses (chap 27-28), and poems (chap 29-33).
Chapters 1-3 are not just an intro to Deuteronomy but also an introduction to the books of Joshua, Judges, 1-2 Samuel, and 1-2 Kings, the narrative history lived under the law of God. These are known as 'the Former Prophets' and follow the monarchy that develops in Israel. Keep this in mind when we begin to read through the Former Prophets in another, starting with Joshua in April.
Finally, here's a brief outline of the book of Deuteronomy:
I. Deut. 1:1-3:29 Introduction to Israel's Story
II. Deut. 4:1-11:32 The Commandments of God
III. Deut. 12:1-26:19 The Deuteronomic Law Code
IV. Deut. 27:1-30:20 Epilogue
V. Deut. 31:1-34:12 Appendix
I hope this helps you a little bit as you begin the adventure in Deuteronomy!
Have a great day!
Allison
Here's the question and answer from yesterday:
Sun, March 15: God tells Moses that he will not enter the Promised Land, but his assistant will. Who is his assistant? (Deut 1)
Deuteronomy 1:37-38 37 Because of you the LORD became angry with me also and said, "You shall not enter it, either. 38 But your assistant, Joshua son of Nun, will enter it. Encourage him, because he will lead Israel to inherit it.
And here's the question of the day:
Mon, Mar 16: Whose descendants live in Seir? (Dt 2)
And here's the reflection of the day:
**Before I go any further, I want to attribute the following information to Ronald Clements, author of the Deuteronomy section of the NIB Commentary. (I don't know what I would do without my shelves of commentaries when it comes to this blog!)
Clements writes that Deuteronomy is the fifth and final book of the "books of Moses," otherwise known as the Pentateuch. These five books are the foundation of the whole Old Testament. These books "provide the basis for the heirs of Abraham, who are also viewed as persons bound in covenant to the Lord God, through the revelation given to Moses on Mt. Sinai (Horeb), to govern their lives as the people of God." After all, that's what God's law is all about, right?
The word "Deuteronomy" means "second law." This is a proper title for this book because it describes it the giving again of the law given to Moses on Mt. Sinai in Exodus; in Deuteronomy, it's "the law given by Moses in the plains of Moab immediately prior to the crossing of the river Jordan and Israel's entry" into the Promised Land.
But Deuteronomy is more than just a book of law (Dt 5; 20). There are also sections of narrative (chap 1-3) that summarize the story of Israel's life in the wilderness. It also has series of exhortations and warnings (chap 6-11), blessings and curses (chap 27-28), and poems (chap 29-33).
Chapters 1-3 are not just an intro to Deuteronomy but also an introduction to the books of Joshua, Judges, 1-2 Samuel, and 1-2 Kings, the narrative history lived under the law of God. These are known as 'the Former Prophets' and follow the monarchy that develops in Israel. Keep this in mind when we begin to read through the Former Prophets in another, starting with Joshua in April.
Finally, here's a brief outline of the book of Deuteronomy:
I. Deut. 1:1-3:29 Introduction to Israel's Story
II. Deut. 4:1-11:32 The Commandments of God
III. Deut. 12:1-26:19 The Deuteronomic Law Code
IV. Deut. 27:1-30:20 Epilogue
V. Deut. 31:1-34:12 Appendix
I hope this helps you a little bit as you begin the adventure in Deuteronomy!
Have a great day!
Allison
Thursday, February 5, 2009
Today's Double Feature
I spent all evening contemplating creative excuses for why I didn't finish the blog entry yesterday, which is especially ironic considering Sunday's sermon, don't you think?! But, alas, I simply forgot. So today I'm determined to make it up to you. So I will post a reflection on one of yesterday's AND today's readings. (It's probably going to take me all morning!!) So, here we go!
Here's the question and answer from yesterday:
Weds, Feb. 4- Whose cry will God hear in Exodus 22?
Exodus 22:22-23, “Do not take advantage of a widow or an orphan. If you do and they cry out to me, I will certainly hear their cry.”
And here's the question of the day:
Thurs, Feb. 5- How much silver does Judas receive to betray Jesus?
And here's the reflection for a reading from YESTERday:
I made a promise not to skip the difficult passages we will inevitably come across as we read through the Bible. I've preached on the almost sacrifice of Isaac and the Canaanite woman Jesus seems pretty rude to. So, this morning, I'm going to tackle the whole "eye for eye" discussion.
Here are the pertinent verses in the larger context:
Exodus 21:22-25 22 When people who are fighting injure a pregnant woman so that there is a miscarriage, and yet no further harm follows, the one responsible shall be fined what the woman's husband demands, paying as much as the judges determine. 23 If any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, 24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.
Earlier this week, I wrote about the idea of LAW and narrative. And here we begin to run into the law, spelled out in specific rules in Exodus. But the law remains firmly in God's hand; it is not an external objective authority completely divorced from history. The law is given by a loving God who is intimately involved in our lives, bringing discipline and mercy to each one of us. The law in this particular section involves interpersonal relationships and are "designed to protect human beings from physical harm by other human beings. . . in order to promote the well-being of all" (Fretheim, Exodus, 249-250).
Laws and consequences for breaking the law were designed to be enforced by the court of law, not by individuals. Fretheim goes on to say: "Some of the penalties may seem unusually severe to us today" (cf "eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth") but that they need to be evaluated in light of the importance of certain interrelationships, meaning the harm to or death of a person requires a stricter penalty than stealing from a neighbor's garden, for example.
Similar ancient Near Eastern penalties show that its "purpose is to provide equality before the law (e.g., the rich could not get by with fines in cases of physical violence)." Several resources I have checked agree with this interpretation. The emphasis seems to be that the punishment should fit the crime. Now, it seems up to the individual COURT OF LAW to decide if the loss of one life requires the loss of the life of the perpetrator.
The New Interpreter's Bible commentary on Exodus suggests that a "law" is not a commandment. In other words, a law given to one society at a particular time is not a law given to every society at any given time. Our contemporary laws are not static, right? They are constantly changing and being re-evaluated so as to make them more effective.
(And, for those of you are into debate and discussion about this topic, what do you do with this: Matthew 5:38-42 38 Jesus said, "You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' 39 But I say to you, Do not resist an evildoer. But if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also; 40 and if anyone wants to sue you and take your coat, give your cloak as well; 41 and if anyone forces you to go one mile, go also the second mile. 42 Give to everyone who begs from you, and do not refuse anyone who wants to borrow from you.")
So what's the answer? Is "eye for an eye" a law or a commandment? Should someone who kills someone else also die as punishment? What is the place of mercy in the law? Well, it doesn't seem like there is a definitive answer. That's why we INTERPRET the Bible--we have to use the brains God gave us and figure out a faithful way to live.
I'm not going to tell you what to believe; I'm not even going to tell you what I believe. I just hope that this info broadens the discussion of "eye for an eye." I'd REALLY like to hear what you have to say about this too!
And here's the reflection from TODAY's readings:
We don't know too much about Judas. Every Gospel and Acts include the story of Judas betraying Jesus and what Judas did after the betrayal.
It's easy to blame Judas and to say that it's all his fault. He was the turn-coat, the biblical Benedict Arnold, started the whole thing. But consider this quote:
Congregational Church pastor L. Alexander Harper makes a remarkable observation about Johann Sebastian Bach's musical representation of the Passion story in the Saint Matthew Passion: "Judas' question to Jesus had always been a solo in other cantatas, because Judas is an individual. Not so for Bach. Breaking all tradition, he has the whole chorus instead sing that guilty question, 'Is it I, Lord?' The chorus represents you, me, the whole world. Judas is within us all, not 'out there' or 'back in history' somewhere comfortably remote. Judas is our brother."
--L. Alexander Harper, "Judas, Our Brother," St. Luke's Journal of Theology 29 (1986),102.
Have you ever thought of the Judas as a brother?
I know these haven't been terrible uplifting conversations, but that's what you get when you read the Bible straight through--the good, the bad, and the ugly. But it's all about God, who is over all and in all and through all. To Him be the glory, even in passages like these!
Allison
Here's the question and answer from yesterday:
Weds, Feb. 4- Whose cry will God hear in Exodus 22?
Exodus 22:22-23, “Do not take advantage of a widow or an orphan. If you do and they cry out to me, I will certainly hear their cry.”
And here's the question of the day:
Thurs, Feb. 5- How much silver does Judas receive to betray Jesus?
And here's the reflection for a reading from YESTERday:
I made a promise not to skip the difficult passages we will inevitably come across as we read through the Bible. I've preached on the almost sacrifice of Isaac and the Canaanite woman Jesus seems pretty rude to. So, this morning, I'm going to tackle the whole "eye for eye" discussion.
Here are the pertinent verses in the larger context:
Exodus 21:22-25 22 When people who are fighting injure a pregnant woman so that there is a miscarriage, and yet no further harm follows, the one responsible shall be fined what the woman's husband demands, paying as much as the judges determine. 23 If any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, 24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.
Earlier this week, I wrote about the idea of LAW and narrative. And here we begin to run into the law, spelled out in specific rules in Exodus. But the law remains firmly in God's hand; it is not an external objective authority completely divorced from history. The law is given by a loving God who is intimately involved in our lives, bringing discipline and mercy to each one of us. The law in this particular section involves interpersonal relationships and are "designed to protect human beings from physical harm by other human beings. . . in order to promote the well-being of all" (Fretheim, Exodus, 249-250).
Laws and consequences for breaking the law were designed to be enforced by the court of law, not by individuals. Fretheim goes on to say: "Some of the penalties may seem unusually severe to us today" (cf "eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth") but that they need to be evaluated in light of the importance of certain interrelationships, meaning the harm to or death of a person requires a stricter penalty than stealing from a neighbor's garden, for example.
Similar ancient Near Eastern penalties show that its "purpose is to provide equality before the law (e.g., the rich could not get by with fines in cases of physical violence)." Several resources I have checked agree with this interpretation. The emphasis seems to be that the punishment should fit the crime. Now, it seems up to the individual COURT OF LAW to decide if the loss of one life requires the loss of the life of the perpetrator.
The New Interpreter's Bible commentary on Exodus suggests that a "law" is not a commandment. In other words, a law given to one society at a particular time is not a law given to every society at any given time. Our contemporary laws are not static, right? They are constantly changing and being re-evaluated so as to make them more effective.
(And, for those of you are into debate and discussion about this topic, what do you do with this: Matthew 5:38-42 38 Jesus said, "You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' 39 But I say to you, Do not resist an evildoer. But if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also; 40 and if anyone wants to sue you and take your coat, give your cloak as well; 41 and if anyone forces you to go one mile, go also the second mile. 42 Give to everyone who begs from you, and do not refuse anyone who wants to borrow from you.")
So what's the answer? Is "eye for an eye" a law or a commandment? Should someone who kills someone else also die as punishment? What is the place of mercy in the law? Well, it doesn't seem like there is a definitive answer. That's why we INTERPRET the Bible--we have to use the brains God gave us and figure out a faithful way to live.
I'm not going to tell you what to believe; I'm not even going to tell you what I believe. I just hope that this info broadens the discussion of "eye for an eye." I'd REALLY like to hear what you have to say about this too!
And here's the reflection from TODAY's readings:
We don't know too much about Judas. Every Gospel and Acts include the story of Judas betraying Jesus and what Judas did after the betrayal.
It's easy to blame Judas and to say that it's all his fault. He was the turn-coat, the biblical Benedict Arnold, started the whole thing. But consider this quote:
Congregational Church pastor L. Alexander Harper makes a remarkable observation about Johann Sebastian Bach's musical representation of the Passion story in the Saint Matthew Passion: "Judas' question to Jesus had always been a solo in other cantatas, because Judas is an individual. Not so for Bach. Breaking all tradition, he has the whole chorus instead sing that guilty question, 'Is it I, Lord?' The chorus represents you, me, the whole world. Judas is within us all, not 'out there' or 'back in history' somewhere comfortably remote. Judas is our brother."
--L. Alexander Harper, "Judas, Our Brother," St. Luke's Journal of Theology 29 (1986),102.
Have you ever thought of the Judas as a brother?
I know these haven't been terrible uplifting conversations, but that's what you get when you read the Bible straight through--the good, the bad, and the ugly. But it's all about God, who is over all and in all and through all. To Him be the glory, even in passages like these!
Allison
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
Law and Narrative
Good morning/afternoon/evening! Here we are--already into February. One month down, 11 to go. Hang in there!
Here's the question and answer from yesterday:
Mon, Feb. 2- What did Moses strike to get water for the people?
Exodus 17:6 “Strike the rock, and the water will come out of it for the people to drink.”
And here's the question of the day:
Feb. 3- Who went into the wedding banquet? (Mt. 25)
And here's the reflection of the day:
One of the unique features of the following chapters in Exodus is how it combines LAW and NARRATIVE into one. Generally, ancient Near Eastern, Greek, and Roman laws were written into criminal or civil codes which stood alone without any commentary or explanation. And histories (or narratives) were kept separate from the laws. Both were handed down through oral tradition (before people kept written copies of things) but were handed down separately.
Here, Exodus mushes them all together; they are woven together so that the narrative cannot be separated from the law. We do not simply read a list of rules (aka the Ten Commandments). Exodus ties story about the law and the law itself together at the same time; the law is not independent from the story.
Among others, here are two things to remember when reading the "law" portions of the Bible:
1. God is the subject of both the law and the narrative. God gave the law and is the protagonist in the story. As one commentator writes, "The narrative enables a fuller picture of the God who stands behind the law, while the law enhances the images of God available in the narrative" (Terence E. Fretheim, Exodus, p 201). The law is given to outline God's expectation for his followers. It is a guide to faithfulness.
2. The law is a gift of God's graciousness tied to a story. It is not just a set of rules, a list of do's and don'ts, to be followed. Law is a part of the larger story of God's goodness and mercy, and it is grounded in God's divine will. God's law is intended to never "leave the people without an indication of what it means to be a community of faith, without a direction in which a person of faith could walk, without some instruction regarding the life of faith" (202-203). God intends that the law extend into all aspects of life, showing that a gift and not a burden.
These are important things to keep in mind as we begin to delve into the "law" portions of the Old Testament. Most laws will seem strange to us, harsh even in some places. (Just wait 'til we get to Leviticus!) Jim Davison notes, in our "Year of the Bible" participant books: "Bear in mind that these laws are given to a group whom God is attempting to turn into a people, and these people live in a world that is in many ways of chaotic." God's law is meant to help them organize their life together as a community of faith.
How do you think of God's law? A list of do's and don'ts to get into heaven? A guide to faithfulness? A little of both? Tell me what you think! Click on the comment narrative below and jot your thoughts into the pop up box. You can make up a screen name, use your real name, or be anonymous. Tell me what you think!
Have a splendid day!
Allison
Here's the question and answer from yesterday:
Mon, Feb. 2- What did Moses strike to get water for the people?
Exodus 17:6 “Strike the rock, and the water will come out of it for the people to drink.”
And here's the question of the day:
Feb. 3- Who went into the wedding banquet? (Mt. 25)
And here's the reflection of the day:
One of the unique features of the following chapters in Exodus is how it combines LAW and NARRATIVE into one. Generally, ancient Near Eastern, Greek, and Roman laws were written into criminal or civil codes which stood alone without any commentary or explanation. And histories (or narratives) were kept separate from the laws. Both were handed down through oral tradition (before people kept written copies of things) but were handed down separately.
Here, Exodus mushes them all together; they are woven together so that the narrative cannot be separated from the law. We do not simply read a list of rules (aka the Ten Commandments). Exodus ties story about the law and the law itself together at the same time; the law is not independent from the story.
Among others, here are two things to remember when reading the "law" portions of the Bible:
1. God is the subject of both the law and the narrative. God gave the law and is the protagonist in the story. As one commentator writes, "The narrative enables a fuller picture of the God who stands behind the law, while the law enhances the images of God available in the narrative" (Terence E. Fretheim, Exodus, p 201). The law is given to outline God's expectation for his followers. It is a guide to faithfulness.
2. The law is a gift of God's graciousness tied to a story. It is not just a set of rules, a list of do's and don'ts, to be followed. Law is a part of the larger story of God's goodness and mercy, and it is grounded in God's divine will. God's law is intended to never "leave the people without an indication of what it means to be a community of faith, without a direction in which a person of faith could walk, without some instruction regarding the life of faith" (202-203). God intends that the law extend into all aspects of life, showing that a gift and not a burden.
These are important things to keep in mind as we begin to delve into the "law" portions of the Old Testament. Most laws will seem strange to us, harsh even in some places. (Just wait 'til we get to Leviticus!) Jim Davison notes, in our "Year of the Bible" participant books: "Bear in mind that these laws are given to a group whom God is attempting to turn into a people, and these people live in a world that is in many ways of chaotic." God's law is meant to help them organize their life together as a community of faith.
How do you think of God's law? A list of do's and don'ts to get into heaven? A guide to faithfulness? A little of both? Tell me what you think! Click on the comment narrative below and jot your thoughts into the pop up box. You can make up a screen name, use your real name, or be anonymous. Tell me what you think!
Have a splendid day!
Allison
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
