I am intrigued by the discussion we had about Saul and how he is presented in 1 Samuel.
Frick notes 4 possible ways of understanding Saul’s role:
-Permanent Judge
-Self appointed protector
-Chieftain
-State Builder
He further indicates that whichever model is espoused, Saul represented something new in Israel. As we discussed in class, there are clearly pro and an anti views of kingship presented in 1Sam 8-12. The alternate view may have been inserted later than the original view to provide a balancing perspective. For me, this idea presents food for thought and leads me to wonder if Saul has gotten not only a bad rap but some bad press as well. I marveled even at the example where Saul was told to go with his army and wait for Samuel to come and offer sacrifice before going to battle. The troops had started to desert, the enemy seemed to be pressing, his experience and training as a warrior told him to strike now, his devotion to God told him not to wait, but to offer the sacrifice then go. Could it be that the influence of his background and training made him momentarily take his eyes off of the direction? Could it be that the writers of history are making a point and giving him a worse name that necessary? The story remains, he disobeyed God, the spirit of God left him, he went mad and ultimately, and, depending on your take of the story, fell on his sword (samurai style which is death with honor). It just feels to me like an abundance of bad press and perspective.
Friday, December 08, 2006
Friday, December 01, 2006
A Treasured Possession To God
In "The Ten Commandments and Human Rights", Walter J. Harrelson reminds us that God’s plan to deliver Israel was only a small part of the plan, the real plan involves us. The story might have started with Israel, but today we are the story. But, how, exactly are we to understand that plan? “To bring wholeness and health to all peoples” (153). Though us!
Harrelson wants us to consider how to execute that plan and why the Ten Commandments are the key to success. But, what makes Harrelson think that this might be news to us? Consider a bit of his rationale:
Have we slowly lapsed into the implicit belief that these Old Testament Commandments have been largely replaced by the two New Testament commandments: “Love God” and “Love neighbor?”
Can our children (and adults!) recite the Ten Commandments?
It’s a secular world and we no longer expect full compliance with the Commandments. To the extent that we do expect compliance, we have secularized some Commandments into laws such as: “Don’t kill” (well, unless you can do so without legal consequences); “Don’t steal” (again, unless you can do so without legal consequences); “No adultery” (the legal consequences of which are condoned and pardoned, often repeatedly); and so on.
Do you find his rationale compelling?
And so, with each passing page, Harrelson slowly tightens his grip around our collective necks.
His message became indelible, for me, with the Hebrew word סְגֻלָּה, pronounced “segullah”, which can mean “a special treasure to God,” as you can see in the following verse: “Now then, if you will obey Me faithfully and keep My covenant, you shall be My treasured possession among all the peoples” (Exodus 19.5).
It’s a book worthy of reading…and praying.
Harrelson wants us to consider how to execute that plan and why the Ten Commandments are the key to success. But, what makes Harrelson think that this might be news to us? Consider a bit of his rationale:
Have we slowly lapsed into the implicit belief that these Old Testament Commandments have been largely replaced by the two New Testament commandments: “Love God” and “Love neighbor?”
Can our children (and adults!) recite the Ten Commandments?
It’s a secular world and we no longer expect full compliance with the Commandments. To the extent that we do expect compliance, we have secularized some Commandments into laws such as: “Don’t kill” (well, unless you can do so without legal consequences); “Don’t steal” (again, unless you can do so without legal consequences); “No adultery” (the legal consequences of which are condoned and pardoned, often repeatedly); and so on.
Do you find his rationale compelling?
And so, with each passing page, Harrelson slowly tightens his grip around our collective necks.
His message became indelible, for me, with the Hebrew word סְגֻלָּה, pronounced “segullah”, which can mean “a special treasure to God,” as you can see in the following verse: “Now then, if you will obey Me faithfully and keep My covenant, you shall be My treasured possession among all the peoples” (Exodus 19.5).
It’s a book worthy of reading…and praying.
Sunday, November 26, 2006
The Land and Genocide
I am intrigued by the notion of reading the bible from perspectives that are different from those one typically hears in Sunday School or Wednesday night bible study. This time it’s about the Exodus account. We learned in class that Dykstra suggests that Exodus should be read (in the US at least) from the perspective of the Egyptians rather than from the Israelites; from that perspective we are privileged people who are concerned primarily with empire building. Under this construct, empire has to do with exploitation, control, dominance, colonization, displacement of indigenous people, and cultural arrogance and global military power. From that perspective it seems that we, as a nation in general, are empire builders in terms of land, finances, social policy, politics, and yes, even religion and spirituality. Our history is rife with examples of the truth of these concepts.
Another item that I find equally intriguing is Robert Warriors’ "A Native American Perspective: Canaanites, Cowboys, and Indians," in Sugirtharajah, Voices from the Margin. He submits that as the Israelite exodus from Egypt and entry into the Promised Land overlooks the Canaanite perspective. If one views the story as a Native American, one might identify more closely with the Canaanites who were pushed out of the land that they populated. In addition, the stories also tell of the commanded genocide of a people. The Israelite’s obedience meant the complete annihilation of a nation. As I had recent conversations about this story, I was captivated by the thoughts ranging from “Well they were told to make the destruction complete and they didn’t obey” to “can you believe that, what do you think God was thinking?”
I am also captivated by pop culture and the fact that, in this case TV, wrestles with the ideas of genocide as well. I’m a fan of the new Battle Star Galactica, where humans are at war with a race of machines (the Cylons) that they created. The machines evolved and now look like the very humans they are trying to eliminate because humans do not appreciate all that they have and don’t deserve to remain in power. With humanity on the run towards this mystical, mythical planet called earth, the humans discover an opportunity to wipe out the entire race once and for all. I saw parallels in the genocide thinking, that one race has to be completely obliterated for the salvation of another. Stay tuned.
Another item that I find equally intriguing is Robert Warriors’ "A Native American Perspective: Canaanites, Cowboys, and Indians," in Sugirtharajah, Voices from the Margin. He submits that as the Israelite exodus from Egypt and entry into the Promised Land overlooks the Canaanite perspective. If one views the story as a Native American, one might identify more closely with the Canaanites who were pushed out of the land that they populated. In addition, the stories also tell of the commanded genocide of a people. The Israelite’s obedience meant the complete annihilation of a nation. As I had recent conversations about this story, I was captivated by the thoughts ranging from “Well they were told to make the destruction complete and they didn’t obey” to “can you believe that, what do you think God was thinking?”
I am also captivated by pop culture and the fact that, in this case TV, wrestles with the ideas of genocide as well. I’m a fan of the new Battle Star Galactica, where humans are at war with a race of machines (the Cylons) that they created. The machines evolved and now look like the very humans they are trying to eliminate because humans do not appreciate all that they have and don’t deserve to remain in power. With humanity on the run towards this mystical, mythical planet called earth, the humans discover an opportunity to wipe out the entire race once and for all. I saw parallels in the genocide thinking, that one race has to be completely obliterated for the salvation of another. Stay tuned.
Saturday, November 18, 2006
A CEO, CUSTOMER, AND EMPLOYEE GO TO CHURCH
Reading Laurel Dykstra’s The Other Side of Exodus reminded me of a series of recent conversations. As I relate those conversations, you can anticipate a question, “Do you know which side of Exodus you are on?” Here’s the short form of those conversations.
I recently heard a CEO of a Fortune 500 company, saying that his company is overwhelmed by demands, “Not only do I feel that my company is oppressed, I myself feel oppressed.” Upon reflection, the collective demands of regulators, shareholders, customers, and employees do indeed lend an oppressive atmosphere.
I heard a customer of the very same company, lamenting about the quality of his recent big-ticket purchase, “They just don’t respond to my phone calls. Customers are oppressed and I myself feel oppressed.” His lament has merit.
That Fortune 500 company relies on Mexican Americans to make its products. By any standard, they are poor, often lacking basic necessities to live. Think about where they are at, in the bottom 20% of wage earners who receive a mere 3% of the total American income, a trend that is somehow worsening. Check the Census Bureau stats for more of these un-Christly facts.
Income, however, is not a reflection of intelligence, as evidenced by one such worker, who commented, “We number in the thousands, yet we are weak. We feel oppressed and I myself feel oppressed.”
This CEO-customer-employee microcosm reveals a cycle of oppression, a pattern unclear to the oppressor yet clear to the one oppressed. The solution to this conundrum has to fall outside of some stereotypical suggestion that draws a line, tossing evil wealthy capitalists on one side and poor innocent ethnic groups on the other. The real answer is infinitely subtle, intangible, cerebral, and…spiritual.
We start to get at the answer by knowing that God is always asking, “Where are you?” As Denise said, “Our responses may not be decisive, but they are crucial.”
A response to God may not remove the physical condition of oppression, but it is a start. A response to God will not redistribute income tomorrow, but it does redistribute righteousness today. A response to God will not bring that CEO, customer, and employee into utopian harmony, but it might bring them to the same church.
With God, we cannot be oppressed.
Dykstra’s reading is sure to raise more questions than answers, but sometimes One answer is all it takes. Now, really, which side of Exodus are you on?
I recently heard a CEO of a Fortune 500 company, saying that his company is overwhelmed by demands, “Not only do I feel that my company is oppressed, I myself feel oppressed.” Upon reflection, the collective demands of regulators, shareholders, customers, and employees do indeed lend an oppressive atmosphere.
I heard a customer of the very same company, lamenting about the quality of his recent big-ticket purchase, “They just don’t respond to my phone calls. Customers are oppressed and I myself feel oppressed.” His lament has merit.
That Fortune 500 company relies on Mexican Americans to make its products. By any standard, they are poor, often lacking basic necessities to live. Think about where they are at, in the bottom 20% of wage earners who receive a mere 3% of the total American income, a trend that is somehow worsening. Check the Census Bureau stats for more of these un-Christly facts.
Income, however, is not a reflection of intelligence, as evidenced by one such worker, who commented, “We number in the thousands, yet we are weak. We feel oppressed and I myself feel oppressed.”
This CEO-customer-employee microcosm reveals a cycle of oppression, a pattern unclear to the oppressor yet clear to the one oppressed. The solution to this conundrum has to fall outside of some stereotypical suggestion that draws a line, tossing evil wealthy capitalists on one side and poor innocent ethnic groups on the other. The real answer is infinitely subtle, intangible, cerebral, and…spiritual.
We start to get at the answer by knowing that God is always asking, “Where are you?” As Denise said, “Our responses may not be decisive, but they are crucial.”
A response to God may not remove the physical condition of oppression, but it is a start. A response to God will not redistribute income tomorrow, but it does redistribute righteousness today. A response to God will not bring that CEO, customer, and employee into utopian harmony, but it might bring them to the same church.
With God, we cannot be oppressed.
Dykstra’s reading is sure to raise more questions than answers, but sometimes One answer is all it takes. Now, really, which side of Exodus are you on?
Thursday, November 09, 2006
God of Our Weary Years
As I read about the Suzerainty treaty form, the format, the tempo and the temper of its parts, I was reminded of how, in my mind at least, the song entitled “Lift Every Voice and Sing” approximates it. Frick outlines the essential elements of this form as Preamble, Historical Prologue, Stipulations, Deposit and public reading, List of witnesses, and Blessings and curses. It appears to me that the Anthem meets these criteria, and could serve, one could argue, as a form of treaty between God and those who hope for freedom from racial oppression. The song, written by James Weldon Johnson, was published in 1949, adopted by the NAACP, and came to be known as The Negro National Anthem. To me it can serve as the reminder of treaty, covenant, and agreement.
PREAMBLE: Lift every voice and sing, till earth and heaven ring, Ring with the harmonies of Liberty;
Let our rejoicing rise High as the listening skies, Let it resound loud as the rolling sea.
Sing a song full of the faith that the dark past has taught us,
Sing a song full of the hope that the present has brought us,
Facing the rising sun of our new day begun, Let us march on till victory is won.
HISTORICAL PROLUGUE: Stony the road we trod, Bitter the chastening rod, Felt in the days when hope unborn had died;
STIPULATIONS/OBLIGATIONS: Yet with a steady beat, have not our weary feet, Come to the place for which our fathers sighed? We have come over a way that with tears have been watered,
LIST OF WITNESSES: We have come, treading our path through the blood of the slaughtered, Out from the gloomy past, till now we stand at last, Where the white gleam of our bright star is cast.
DEPOSIT AND PUBLIC READING: God of our weary years, God of our silent tears, Thou who has brought us thus far on the way; Thou who has by Thy might Led us into the light, Keep us forever in the path, we pray. Lest our feet stray from the places, Our God, where we met Thee;
Lest, our hearts drunk with the wine of the world, we forget Thee;
BLESSINGS: Shadowed beneath Thy hand, May we forever stand. True to our GOD, True to our native land.
PREAMBLE: Lift every voice and sing, till earth and heaven ring, Ring with the harmonies of Liberty;
Let our rejoicing rise High as the listening skies, Let it resound loud as the rolling sea.
Sing a song full of the faith that the dark past has taught us,
Sing a song full of the hope that the present has brought us,
Facing the rising sun of our new day begun, Let us march on till victory is won.
HISTORICAL PROLUGUE: Stony the road we trod, Bitter the chastening rod, Felt in the days when hope unborn had died;
STIPULATIONS/OBLIGATIONS: Yet with a steady beat, have not our weary feet, Come to the place for which our fathers sighed? We have come over a way that with tears have been watered,
LIST OF WITNESSES: We have come, treading our path through the blood of the slaughtered, Out from the gloomy past, till now we stand at last, Where the white gleam of our bright star is cast.
DEPOSIT AND PUBLIC READING: God of our weary years, God of our silent tears, Thou who has brought us thus far on the way; Thou who has by Thy might Led us into the light, Keep us forever in the path, we pray. Lest our feet stray from the places, Our God, where we met Thee;
Lest, our hearts drunk with the wine of the world, we forget Thee;
BLESSINGS: Shadowed beneath Thy hand, May we forever stand. True to our GOD, True to our native land.
Monday, October 16, 2006
“Curtain Call, Renita Weems!”
“Curtain Call, Renita Weems!”
Abraham is cast in the main role in the Genesis story. He is righteous, upholding, steadfast, and favored in the eyes of God. Abraham is a man of few emotions. For all his faith, he displays little compassion for the mother of Ishmael. He hands his beautiful wife, Sarai, over to the Egyptians in Chapter 12. In Chapter 16, Abraham declines to get involved in the family crisis, telling Sarai to “do to her as you please.” Only limited conversation is revealed between husband and wife. The next contact occurs in Chapter 18 when he tells her to “make ready” some food. It is difficult to figure Abraham. We learn in chapter 21 that, at Sarah’s direction, Hagar and Ishmael are sent homeless into the wilderness of Beersheeba. Although Abraham is distressed at the loss of a son, he does not appear saddened in the least over the loss of Hagar. A little bread and water for the road was the extent of his consideration. Now it’s doubly difficult to figure Abraham.
We love him, but does he love us?
Renita Weems pursues a different path. For a great read, open to chapter one, A Mistress, A Maid, And No Mercy in her book Just A Sister Away. It is for mature audiences only, tough love to say the least. It is a story, says Ms. Weems, of racism, class stratification, sins of arrogance, mercy, betrayal, distrust, conspiracies, and most of all, sisters.
Ms. Weems wants to spotlight women. In times of need, as both Sarai and Hagar are, each was in need of healing that could have come from a sister. They find themselves, like the name of the book, Just A Sister Away. What each needed most, the other had.
Ms. Weems writes with shocking insights.
She makes it clear that she is haunted by the problem of exploitation saying, “I am painfully aware of this…when I eat out at a restaurant and the white waitress who is the age of my mother calls me ‘Ma’am.’”
I, of course, do wish Ms. Weems had spotlighted Abraham. That is a story easy to imagine. What was Abraham doing while all of this transpired? As Hagar suffered? As Ishmael hungered? As Sarah watched and walked? I, of course, wish she would write about Abraham and men who are Just A Brother Away.
Abraham is cast in the main role in the Genesis story. He is righteous, upholding, steadfast, and favored in the eyes of God. Abraham is a man of few emotions. For all his faith, he displays little compassion for the mother of Ishmael. He hands his beautiful wife, Sarai, over to the Egyptians in Chapter 12. In Chapter 16, Abraham declines to get involved in the family crisis, telling Sarai to “do to her as you please.” Only limited conversation is revealed between husband and wife. The next contact occurs in Chapter 18 when he tells her to “make ready” some food. It is difficult to figure Abraham. We learn in chapter 21 that, at Sarah’s direction, Hagar and Ishmael are sent homeless into the wilderness of Beersheeba. Although Abraham is distressed at the loss of a son, he does not appear saddened in the least over the loss of Hagar. A little bread and water for the road was the extent of his consideration. Now it’s doubly difficult to figure Abraham.
We love him, but does he love us?
Renita Weems pursues a different path. For a great read, open to chapter one, A Mistress, A Maid, And No Mercy in her book Just A Sister Away. It is for mature audiences only, tough love to say the least. It is a story, says Ms. Weems, of racism, class stratification, sins of arrogance, mercy, betrayal, distrust, conspiracies, and most of all, sisters.
Ms. Weems wants to spotlight women. In times of need, as both Sarai and Hagar are, each was in need of healing that could have come from a sister. They find themselves, like the name of the book, Just A Sister Away. What each needed most, the other had.
Ms. Weems writes with shocking insights.
She makes it clear that she is haunted by the problem of exploitation saying, “I am painfully aware of this…when I eat out at a restaurant and the white waitress who is the age of my mother calls me ‘Ma’am.’”
I, of course, do wish Ms. Weems had spotlighted Abraham. That is a story easy to imagine. What was Abraham doing while all of this transpired? As Hagar suffered? As Ishmael hungered? As Sarah watched and walked? I, of course, wish she would write about Abraham and men who are Just A Brother Away.
Sunday, October 15, 2006
Sarah and Hagar
Esla Tamez notes for us that Hagar faced a triple constraint of being a woman, a slave and Egyptian (a foreigner), yet she is firmly inserted in the Matriarchal/Patriarchal stories of Genesis, as well as having the distinct honor that the writers attribute to her of being spoken to by God directly (not even Joseph a man, a descendent of Abraham, a person in authority and one whom God used to save a nation, had that direct privilege). It’s interesting to me that our conversation in class about Sarah seeming to go along with Abraham’s charge to lie about who she was to him. When we ultimately do hear her speak on her own, it seems petty, self serving and cruel because she is apparently threatened and hurt at her perception of Abrahams’ looking on her with distaste. I wonder about the condition of her heart, and what was really going on that encouraged her to behave in such a fashion, and encouraged the writers to memorialize her behavior in that way. The story plays out and yet again confirms that people are people.
For Hagar, perhaps her ultimate is a grace note of justice by God to address the feeble attempts of people to fulfill God’s promises on their own, and in their own way. An all too familiar theme.
Tamez also notes how Hagar and Ishmael are marginalized in a scenario very familiar to domestic servants throughout time. The servant is thrown out of the house because she bears a child by the master as she is powerless to say “no”. This is also a theme played out time and again in the US period of slavery US. Again, this is an all too familiar theme of the control of the powerful over the less than powerful, while God’s grace notes are awaited.
For Hagar, perhaps her ultimate is a grace note of justice by God to address the feeble attempts of people to fulfill God’s promises on their own, and in their own way. An all too familiar theme.
Tamez also notes how Hagar and Ishmael are marginalized in a scenario very familiar to domestic servants throughout time. The servant is thrown out of the house because she bears a child by the master as she is powerless to say “no”. This is also a theme played out time and again in the US period of slavery US. Again, this is an all too familiar theme of the control of the powerful over the less than powerful, while God’s grace notes are awaited.
Saturday, September 23, 2006
Reflection on the Yahwist Creation Story
Points to Reflect Upon:
- Every human is a creature of the one Creator, God
- God's initmate relationship with each us, from the moment He first created us
Genesis 2: 7 taken from the NRSV:
"then the Lord God formed man from the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and the man became a living being."
Read Birch, page 51 2nd paragraph "God is imaged as a potter Genesis (2:7)
Take a moment to reflect and pray on just how intimate God chooses to relate with each us, even in the first breath that God provides us.
Friday, September 22, 2006
Where's Ishmael?
Where's Ishmael?
How does Genesis and the OT (Old Testament) speak to you in terms of a Christian faith? Does the Old Testament have a significant place in a Christian life? Does our church include OT readings in the lectionary to rebut Marcion, or is there meaning there just as in the NT?One of our reformers, Calvin, loved to write about the unity of the Bible, the unity of the message of the Bible to Christians. “There is a continuity of God’s world” (Birch, 33).The greatest painter of Reformed Protestantism was Rembrandt. Rembrandt painted a scene from Genesis 18.2-15 entitled, Abraham Entertaining the Lord and the Two Angels. http://www.nga.gov/feature/artnation/rembrandt/thestory_1.shtm.His representation was excellent in all regards, except one. It becomes readily apparent that Rembrandt did the unthinkable; he deliberately chose to alter a key detail in the scene as described in Genesis 18.2-15. Why would Rembrandt choose to alter a key piece of information that is described in the Bible? To do so was very unusual, especially for a Protestant Dutch artist working in a predominantly Protestant land.Having read the text, you will note no mention of the small boy in the background playing with his bow. That’s Ishmael, but what is he doing in this Rembrandt scene?Scholars say that this is a Rembrandt/Calvin sign of unity and inclusiveness; a sign of God’s universality; a God of many nations; a God who blessed Ishmael and Isaac; a God of an Old Covenant and a God of a New Covenant.“The God of Israel is the same God seen as incarnate in Jesus Christ, and it is our recognition of God’s grace in creation, promise, deliverance, covenant making, judgment, and redemption in Israel’s story that allows us to understand more fully the divine grace we see in Jesus Christ” (Birch, 32).How do you find Christianity in the OT?
How does Genesis and the OT (Old Testament) speak to you in terms of a Christian faith? Does the Old Testament have a significant place in a Christian life? Does our church include OT readings in the lectionary to rebut Marcion, or is there meaning there just as in the NT?One of our reformers, Calvin, loved to write about the unity of the Bible, the unity of the message of the Bible to Christians. “There is a continuity of God’s world” (Birch, 33).The greatest painter of Reformed Protestantism was Rembrandt. Rembrandt painted a scene from Genesis 18.2-15 entitled, Abraham Entertaining the Lord and the Two Angels. http://www.nga.gov/feature/artnation/rembrandt/thestory_1.shtm.His representation was excellent in all regards, except one. It becomes readily apparent that Rembrandt did the unthinkable; he deliberately chose to alter a key detail in the scene as described in Genesis 18.2-15. Why would Rembrandt choose to alter a key piece of information that is described in the Bible? To do so was very unusual, especially for a Protestant Dutch artist working in a predominantly Protestant land.Having read the text, you will note no mention of the small boy in the background playing with his bow. That’s Ishmael, but what is he doing in this Rembrandt scene?Scholars say that this is a Rembrandt/Calvin sign of unity and inclusiveness; a sign of God’s universality; a God of many nations; a God who blessed Ishmael and Isaac; a God of an Old Covenant and a God of a New Covenant.“The God of Israel is the same God seen as incarnate in Jesus Christ, and it is our recognition of God’s grace in creation, promise, deliverance, covenant making, judgment, and redemption in Israel’s story that allows us to understand more fully the divine grace we see in Jesus Christ” (Birch, 32).How do you find Christianity in the OT?
Thursday, September 21, 2006
Redemption
People attempt to understand and explain the sacred texts relative to world in which they live, the socio-political climate, the geography, and their personal issues of faith, or vice versa. Darwin, Calvin, the brothers Grimm (as a definition source), anthropologist Claus Levi-Strauss, each I believe, served a purpose in the effort to explain the bible in general, and Genesis/creation specifically. Frick speaks to the term “history” and proposes two possible translations for consideration. One refers to something as presented as “factual” accounts, and the other represents the past events in addition to an interpretation of the event. I’m intrigued by the Priestly creation story that presents a structured and ordered and balanced account of the story. On some level this order out of chaos speaks to me, especially as Frick outlines the key elements; an announcement of what God said, the command, the assertion that what God commanded did happen, God’s assessment, a statement of conclusion.
On another note, I simply can’t pass up the opportunity to note (especially in light of the discussion in class about the continuation of the literary type of bringing order to chaos, violence to create redemption… Roadrunner, Dirty Harry, Get Smart. As an avid Star Trek fan, the episode about the redemption story entitled “Gilgamesh” where Captain Picard recounted the story and played out the redemption saga, was not lost on me. Yes, the same Babylonian “Epic of Gilgamesh” creation account… Hmmmm.
On another note, I simply can’t pass up the opportunity to note (especially in light of the discussion in class about the continuation of the literary type of bringing order to chaos, violence to create redemption… Roadrunner, Dirty Harry, Get Smart. As an avid Star Trek fan, the episode about the redemption story entitled “Gilgamesh” where Captain Picard recounted the story and played out the redemption saga, was not lost on me. Yes, the same Babylonian “Epic of Gilgamesh” creation account… Hmmmm.
Tuesday, September 19, 2006
After You Receive An Invitation to Post Blogs
1. You will need to create both a google account
(using a full email address as your user account).
2. Then you will receive an email from google
that will need to reply verifying your email address.
3. Then you will need to create a blogspot account.
I would highly recommend that you use the
exact same full email google user account for the
blogspot account name with the same password.
(using a full email address as your user account).
2. Then you will receive an email from google
that will need to reply verifying your email address.
3. Then you will need to create a blogspot account.
I would highly recommend that you use the
exact same full email google user account for the
blogspot account name with the same password.
Sunday, September 17, 2006
One Possible Resource
Here is a possibly resource from the Access Foundation:
The Hebrew Bible, Apocrypha, New Testament, the Quranand a complete Bible Atlas at
http://www.anova.org/sev/
http://www.anova.org/sev/atlas/htm/
http://www.anova.org/sev/zip/bible_atlas.Zip
Good Luck on the Map Quizz this Monday!
submitted by: Melanie Whelan 09/17/2006
The Hebrew Bible, Apocrypha, New Testament, the Quranand a complete Bible Atlas at
http://www.anova.org/sev/
http://www.anova.org/sev/atlas/htm/
http://www.anova.org/sev/zip/bible_atlas.Zip
Good Luck on the Map Quizz this Monday!
submitted by: Melanie Whelan 09/17/2006
Friday, September 15, 2006
Posted for HS
Speaking of the Documentary Hypothesis, given the tone and content of the Pentateuch, can we assume that J, E, D, and P were males? At least one scholar in your midst allows that women may very well deem the Bible to be "hopelessly and irredeemably misogynistic."
The facts are clear. In comparable positions, women are not treated the same as men. Women generally do not rise to the positions in military, government, or business that men do. Socially, women are often expected to be subservient to men. In the Bible, women are often "objects at someone's disposal." How do you interpret the Bible when you read: "Then the word of the Lord came to him, saying, "(Elijah) Go now to Zarephath, which belongs to Sidon, and live there; for I have commanded a widow there to feed you"
(1 Kings 17:8)
Does the word "marginalized" come to mind? Some 2,700 years later, has the scenario changed since J, E, D, and P - whoever they were in name or gender - framed the Pentateuch? How should women interpret the Bible and how should men, in turn, interpret the Bible?
Have a look at Dr. Ringe's When Women Interpret the Bible. After reading it once, note your sentiments, then try it again a day later. We'd like to hear about your interpretation!
The facts are clear. In comparable positions, women are not treated the same as men. Women generally do not rise to the positions in military, government, or business that men do. Socially, women are often expected to be subservient to men. In the Bible, women are often "objects at someone's disposal." How do you interpret the Bible when you read: "Then the word of the Lord came to him, saying, "(Elijah) Go now to Zarephath, which belongs to Sidon, and live there; for I have commanded a widow there to feed you"
(1 Kings 17:8)
Does the word "marginalized" come to mind? Some 2,700 years later, has the scenario changed since J, E, D, and P - whoever they were in name or gender - framed the Pentateuch? How should women interpret the Bible and how should men, in turn, interpret the Bible?
Have a look at Dr. Ringe's When Women Interpret the Bible. After reading it once, note your sentiments, then try it again a day later. We'd like to hear about your interpretation!
Tuesday, September 12, 2006
Hebrew Bible
Hebrew Bible
09/12/2006: Also if you want to post a blog....
Please send me your email address
to pastor2bmelaniew@yahoo.com
Then you will receive an email invitation
Then you will need to create an blogspot account
directions are included in the email message
After you have created an account on blogspot.com
you may starting posting to our hebrew-bible.blogspot.com by
clicking on the orange/ white "B" icon
located on the top left corner of the browser.
09/12/2006: Also if you want to post a blog....
Please send me your email address
to pastor2bmelaniew@yahoo.com
Then you will receive an email invitation
Then you will need to create an blogspot account
directions are included in the email message
After you have created an account on blogspot.com
you may starting posting to our hebrew-bible.blogspot.com by
clicking on the orange/ white "B" icon
located on the top left corner of the browser.
Hebrew Bible
Hebrew Bible
09/12/2006:
Good morning....Send me your email address so I can add to
the blog list.
Thank you.
09/12/2006:
Good morning....Send me your email address so I can add to
the blog list.
Thank you.
Monday, September 11, 2006
Hebrew Bible I
As stated in the course syllabus, "As a group of co-learners explore an introductory survey of the Hebrew Bible and the history of ancient Israel up through the emergence of Judaism and the Second Temple period. Focusing on crucial theological and hermeneutical issues which emerge out of our reflection on the place of the Hebrew Bible in Christian faith and the life of the church today:
To outline the contents of the Hebrew Bible
To trace the history of ancient Israel and Second Temple Judaism.
To reconstruct the emergence of the literature of the Hebrew Bible out of the life of ancient Israel.
To hear the questions and perspectives of people from diverse racial, cultural, and economic contexts as they/we encounter the Hebrew Bible.
To develop a critical consciousness of the ideological nature of both the theological witnesses within the Hebrew Bible and contemporary appropriation of those witnesses.
To discover how the Hebrew Bible can inform Christian faith and practice, i.e. serve as a resource for the life of the church."
To outline the contents of the Hebrew Bible
To trace the history of ancient Israel and Second Temple Judaism.
To reconstruct the emergence of the literature of the Hebrew Bible out of the life of ancient Israel.
To hear the questions and perspectives of people from diverse racial, cultural, and economic contexts as they/we encounter the Hebrew Bible.
To develop a critical consciousness of the ideological nature of both the theological witnesses within the Hebrew Bible and contemporary appropriation of those witnesses.
To discover how the Hebrew Bible can inform Christian faith and practice, i.e. serve as a resource for the life of the church."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)