David attempts to solve all Israel's problems forever. It doesn't quite work. The darn Philistines appear again. David grows weary. A second Goliath, representative of a remnant of giants...
Then there's the song of David, which seems to reflect heavily on later Christian theology, not to mention love of that common Books of Samuel theme, warfare. It's very similar language to the psalms, like what they were based on. Although war itself will remain a focus of the narrative for some time, it no longer seems quite the driving force of Israel's future. Although there is, again, much love for it.
God's wrath is kindled again, although David is able to appease him after a selection of three punishments ends with classical biblical plague. No overt smiting. End of Second Book of Samuel.
The beginning of First Book of Kings sees David in old age given a concubine to help keep his increasingly frail body warm. First Kings makes it clear they don't have sex, though, in case you wanted to know. Mutinous behavior continues, this time with another son, who is also described as exceptionally handsome (I guess this is where all our modern literature gets the idea from). Nathan quickly gets Bathsheba to put Solomon under protection, because he's the clear threat to the usurper. David has a signature mule, which Solomon symbolically rides to drive the point home (reminiscent of Jesus on Palm Sunday). He's soon anointed to make it official that he's the one who's king and David successor. Like his father before him, Solomon pursues a policy of forgiveness against his rivals. David implores him to also keep his other traditions alive. Then the old king dies.
Solomon begins consolidating his power, settling old affairs such as finally dealing with Joab (read: executing him). He makes a marriage alliance with Egypt, which is growing in biblical importance again. It only figures, because this is only the start of many allusions to past events. He also begins building up Jerusalem, making it truly fit for a king.
God grants him the choice of three extraordinary favors, and Solomon famously chooses wisdom, so he gets all of them anyway. Then follows another anecdote you'll certainly recognize, the wise act of figuring out who the real mother is when a dispute arises, threatening to split the child in two. It's the example everyone uses, and I guess it's the one the Bible does, too. In short order the later psalms and proverbs are attributed to him. Preparations for the temple are made. Clearly Solomon was thought of in great terms by the later Hebrews, as pretty much everything their is to know about his reign is recorded in minute detail, far greater than even similar work that had been done in the Books of Samuel. These are the most important books after the Moses cycle to the Jewish faith, and they're also the most important ones to Christian faith from the Old Testament.
It's also perhaps significant that the extreme detail that God related to Moses concerning the ark in the first place is more than represented in explaining the temple's many opulent features.
For the record, First Kings records the amount of time since the exile from Egypt to the time of Solomon at 480 years. That's about for us modern readers the whole American continent history from Columbus to our day.
God keeps reiterating that if Solomon remains on the straight and narrow everything will be perfect for Israel. Of course he does!
It took 7 years to complete work on the temple. There's a great ceremony to commemorate the ark's journey to its final resting place in the temple. It's at this point that the reader may realize that the true main character of the Bible to this point has been the ark, which has been present from Moses to Solomon. The promise God made David that it would be Solomon who saw the building of the temple is a little like when Moses was told it would be Joshua who entered the promised land. It wasn't until David had the idea that the temple was even considered a final destination. God had been content to let the ark travel freely through Israel. There are more echoes of Moses, although it's compassion and forgiveness that God prefers these days, rather than his old policy of smiting first and asking questions later (you know, basically). It tends to read like a reflection of later New Testament theology.
I know, I keep saying that. It's there, what else can I say?
It took 20 years in all, including Solomon's own elaborate lodgings, to complete construction work.
The Queen of Sheba shows up to test Solomon, and he passes it. Although, on a related note or not, his many romantic conquests really start to take their toll on him. He starts putting other gods before, or at least alongside, God. This does not please God, who revokes his charter and then agrees to let the Hebrews keep Jerusalem but nothing else.
A new enemy (the first of several) arises, Hadad, who once had occasion to hide out in Egypt. The same is true of Jeroboam (who in his earlier days received a prophecy that he would one day inherit a part of Solomon's kingdom, which led Solomon to try and eliminate him). All this fleeing to Egypt evokes both Joseph in the past and Mary and the other Joseph in the future. A third enemy is Rezon.
There's a strong indication that Solomon, like Adam before him, was always meant to fall. Probably the Jewish people would much have preferred a permanent and considerable kingdom, but that's just not something that happened. A good thing always ends. Call it a proverb.
Solomon reigned for 40 years, and then he died.
Friday, December 20, 2013
Thursday, December 19, 2013
Second Book of Samuel 1-20
The second book in the grand history of Hebrew warfare begins with David learning of the deaths of Jonathan and Saul. The bearer of the news claims he killed Saul, which contradicts the ending of First Samuel. Stupid mistake on his part, anyway. David quickly has him put to death. David goes on to produce a lament/poem about his fallen comrades, which includes the refrain, "how are the mighty fallen," which would be interesting if it's the origin of the phrase "how the mighty have fallen," since the two would have very different meanings. David, as Second Samuel quickly makes very apparent, is very fond of both Saul and Jonathan in death. The latter phrase is a common derogatory utterance for people you have not admired.
God is being used as a consultant these days.
The kingdom becomes divided rather than united under David. Weird that this would be the case, since in a lot of ways David was supposed to be the epitome of the Jewish dream. One of Saul's sons rules part of the kingdom, while David's divided reign lasts 7 years. The in-fighting keeps evolving, and fittingly around the house of Saul and the house of David. David's grows stronger. It only figures. It's Abner who flies the banner of Saul. They eventually make peace. And then Abner is assassinated. It's funny, David maintains his tradition of lamenting the death of his enemy. He knows true rivals when he sees them. He respects them, and honors them in death. He insists on the inherent goodness of both Saul and Abner, angry when those beneath him say their deaths were good for Israel.
David was 30 when his reign began, and in total it lasted 40 years, a telling (as in how many years Jesus lived) 33 years under the united crown.
David's city is variously reported as Zion or Jerusalem.
Unlike Jesus, David doesn't much care, usually, for the blind or the lame. He makes an exception in the latter case for Jonathan's son.
He takes the fight back to the Philistines. Cherubim are referenced for the first time. This is theology evolving. Some poor schlub touches the ark and is smited by God, a policy David seems to disagree with. He finally brings the ark to a permanent home. Nathan is soon asking for what amounts to the first temple. Michal, David's wife who is also Saul's daughter, is not pleased to see David return, probably upset at his surviving and her father not their conflict. It's an attitude that's similar to David's brother's earlier, and may confirm my suspicion that dissent from the common opinion may stem from jealousy.
God makes a new covenant with David that's similar to what he made with Abraham, except instead of providing for a whole slew of descendants he speaks of making David's specific line very special. The New Testament interprets this as indicating Jesus. God includes the line, "I will be his father and he shall be my son," which in the Christian perspective is made very literal. If it's meant to refer to Solomon, well...like (that) father like (that) son.
The Philistines are finally eliminated from their perennial threat, as David celebrates. More enemies are eliminated. As David continues to show extreme loyalty to the legacies of Saul and Jonathan, it may be seen as resembling God's devotion to his people, and the loyalty/forgiveness of it to the whole Judeo-Christian tradition from the fall of Adam onward. We screw up and God (no matter how much he really wants to) never truly gives up on us.
So, enter Bathsheba, the famed bathing beauty. David falls hard for her, starts thinking like Samson and Saul before him ways to get her husband out of the picture. He eventually sends the poor guy into the front-lines of battle. God is displeased. Nathan has the occasion to deliver the first parable of the Bible. God isn't upset so much because of the adultery of it (which was one of the big no-nos outlined in the books of Moses) but because David tried to keep it a secret. He and David patch up their differences, and only Bathsheba's resulting child is punished. David grieves while it struggles toward death, and then to the confusion of everyone around the king, stops as soon as the child dies.
How is Bathsheba really important? She's the mother of Solomon!
One of David's son rapes his own sister. This is the start of a whole bloody affair. The son quickly rejects the sister, and another son, Absalom, wreaks terrible vengeance. It marks the first time he plots a conspiracy. Like a regular Shakespeare character, or as Second Samuel increasingly seems, a Greek tragedy.
On the plus side, like his son Solomon later, David is spoken of as possessing great wisdom. Absalom is described as uniquely handsome in the land, like Saul and David before him. He seems to almost be a new Saul, like the predecessor so the successor goes.
David visits the Mount of Olives. The New Testament looms. The conspiracies of Absalom, in fact, start sounding a lot like Judas and Jesus. There is even a betrayal with a kiss at one point.
The phrase, "long live the king!" is uttered.
David goes into hiding, "even now he has hidden himself in one of the pits," which evokes the much later Saddam Hussein and his rat hole. I guess that was a thing a long time ago, too. David in exile is like Moses after guiding the Hebrews out of Egypt. Those with him complain of starving.
Absalom eventually ends up caught in a tree during the decisive battle with David. Some debate (not involving David) follows as to what to do with him. He ends up dead. David, of course, still mourns him, even though he's just tried to usurp the kingdom, after all the weird twists that followed Absalom's murder of his brother. David's men are jealous of this grief. More tumult follows. A place called Abel is referenced, with no reference to the son of Adam, although it certainly evokes the most famous circumstances of his life. This time the troublemaker is Joab, who has replaced Absalom in every sense. He's the guy who killed him, and then took on the rivalry with David, apparently just for the taste of power for finding himself all of a sudden significant.
If you didn't know all this was essential to a lot of people's faith, you could easily read this for no particular religious reason at all...
God is being used as a consultant these days.
The kingdom becomes divided rather than united under David. Weird that this would be the case, since in a lot of ways David was supposed to be the epitome of the Jewish dream. One of Saul's sons rules part of the kingdom, while David's divided reign lasts 7 years. The in-fighting keeps evolving, and fittingly around the house of Saul and the house of David. David's grows stronger. It only figures. It's Abner who flies the banner of Saul. They eventually make peace. And then Abner is assassinated. It's funny, David maintains his tradition of lamenting the death of his enemy. He knows true rivals when he sees them. He respects them, and honors them in death. He insists on the inherent goodness of both Saul and Abner, angry when those beneath him say their deaths were good for Israel.
David was 30 when his reign began, and in total it lasted 40 years, a telling (as in how many years Jesus lived) 33 years under the united crown.
David's city is variously reported as Zion or Jerusalem.
Unlike Jesus, David doesn't much care, usually, for the blind or the lame. He makes an exception in the latter case for Jonathan's son.
He takes the fight back to the Philistines. Cherubim are referenced for the first time. This is theology evolving. Some poor schlub touches the ark and is smited by God, a policy David seems to disagree with. He finally brings the ark to a permanent home. Nathan is soon asking for what amounts to the first temple. Michal, David's wife who is also Saul's daughter, is not pleased to see David return, probably upset at his surviving and her father not their conflict. It's an attitude that's similar to David's brother's earlier, and may confirm my suspicion that dissent from the common opinion may stem from jealousy.
God makes a new covenant with David that's similar to what he made with Abraham, except instead of providing for a whole slew of descendants he speaks of making David's specific line very special. The New Testament interprets this as indicating Jesus. God includes the line, "I will be his father and he shall be my son," which in the Christian perspective is made very literal. If it's meant to refer to Solomon, well...like (that) father like (that) son.
The Philistines are finally eliminated from their perennial threat, as David celebrates. More enemies are eliminated. As David continues to show extreme loyalty to the legacies of Saul and Jonathan, it may be seen as resembling God's devotion to his people, and the loyalty/forgiveness of it to the whole Judeo-Christian tradition from the fall of Adam onward. We screw up and God (no matter how much he really wants to) never truly gives up on us.
So, enter Bathsheba, the famed bathing beauty. David falls hard for her, starts thinking like Samson and Saul before him ways to get her husband out of the picture. He eventually sends the poor guy into the front-lines of battle. God is displeased. Nathan has the occasion to deliver the first parable of the Bible. God isn't upset so much because of the adultery of it (which was one of the big no-nos outlined in the books of Moses) but because David tried to keep it a secret. He and David patch up their differences, and only Bathsheba's resulting child is punished. David grieves while it struggles toward death, and then to the confusion of everyone around the king, stops as soon as the child dies.
How is Bathsheba really important? She's the mother of Solomon!
One of David's son rapes his own sister. This is the start of a whole bloody affair. The son quickly rejects the sister, and another son, Absalom, wreaks terrible vengeance. It marks the first time he plots a conspiracy. Like a regular Shakespeare character, or as Second Samuel increasingly seems, a Greek tragedy.
On the plus side, like his son Solomon later, David is spoken of as possessing great wisdom. Absalom is described as uniquely handsome in the land, like Saul and David before him. He seems to almost be a new Saul, like the predecessor so the successor goes.
David visits the Mount of Olives. The New Testament looms. The conspiracies of Absalom, in fact, start sounding a lot like Judas and Jesus. There is even a betrayal with a kiss at one point.
The phrase, "long live the king!" is uttered.
David goes into hiding, "even now he has hidden himself in one of the pits," which evokes the much later Saddam Hussein and his rat hole. I guess that was a thing a long time ago, too. David in exile is like Moses after guiding the Hebrews out of Egypt. Those with him complain of starving.
Absalom eventually ends up caught in a tree during the decisive battle with David. Some debate (not involving David) follows as to what to do with him. He ends up dead. David, of course, still mourns him, even though he's just tried to usurp the kingdom, after all the weird twists that followed Absalom's murder of his brother. David's men are jealous of this grief. More tumult follows. A place called Abel is referenced, with no reference to the son of Adam, although it certainly evokes the most famous circumstances of his life. This time the troublemaker is Joab, who has replaced Absalom in every sense. He's the guy who killed him, and then took on the rivalry with David, apparently just for the taste of power for finding himself all of a sudden significant.
If you didn't know all this was essential to a lot of people's faith, you could easily read this for no particular religious reason at all...
Wednesday, December 18, 2013
First Book of Samuel 11-31
The First Book of Samuel has more classic biblical warfare. Seriously, I bet you could get a lot more people to read at least the Old Testament if they knew how much fighting goes on in it. Plenty of it could very well read like fantasy fiction (Othniel of Middle Earth the judge!), and you can see where not just many of the names you know came from but also some you wouldn't expect to see here (Endor!) can be found too.
Anyway, Saul is very much a warrior king. Samuel may have a different or perhaps only from a certain point of view version of biblical history, when he states "Jacob went into Egypt," where it was clearly Joseph his son who made the family mark there, as clearly stated in Genesis and the start of Exodus. He goes on with further summarizing, which either I wasn't reading closely enough or doesn't exactly follow the Judges record of the judges era, or at least vastly condenses it (no mention of Samson, for instance, who has come to dominate the modern view of that time).
First Samuel doesn't seem so keen on the need for a Hebrew king, that it's kind of a sign of weakness. May be another foreshadow of how the New Testament develops.
Saul's reign lasts for 2 years. It's festooned with Philistine conflict. Those darn Philistines! Samuel is a little like Moses in interpreting what God thinks of certain circumstances. He's displeased with how Saul conducts himself after a battle, thinks it has something to do with hubris. Saul's son Jonathan, as with the remainder of the book, serves as a counterpoint to Saul himself. When one is presented as generally good, the other is presented as generally bad.
Saul's whole family is laid out, the way genealogies were done in previous books. This may be the difference in how long ago the events being recorded took place. His big offense has something to do with preferring sacrifice over obedience. In the numerous laws of Moses, sacrifice was essential to just about everything. That was only a few books ago. Times change. Please take note, religious observers.
Jesse shows up again. He's not really important. It's his offspring, and specifically David, that we really care about. From here, you will start to know a lot of this. Samuel anoints David, the new more perfect chosen one. It's interesting how Saul and David initially interact. Saul calls for some help dealing with what's described as an evil spirit from God (certainly an interesting twist if it's the same as later and more famous demonic possession) but what I'll call foul moods. David is called upon to soothe his lord, a sacred cord no doubt (alleluia!), playing a lyre whenever Saul needs it. Saul is pleased. He thinks very favorably of young David, at first.
The Philistines return for more trouble! Goliath! The valley of Elah looms!
Jesse's sheep are kept in Bethlehem. New Testament looms!
It's interesting that David's brother describes him as presumptuous and having evil in his heart. Maybe it's jealousy. Maybe it's a peek at David's true personality?
Speaking of New Testament looming, David is a "good shepherd," delivered by God from the clutches of predators. It's impossible that in the midst of all the interpreting of scripture he did, Jesus or his friends wouldn't have noted any of this.
David's weapon isn't so much the slingshot as his faith in God. Goliath falls. Head served on a platter, another odd little echo to be found in the New Testament with John the Baptist.
Jonathan's stock is rising as he becomes fast friends with David. Saul starts thinking more craftily as he begins his pursuit of David. He becomes a lot more like Samson. This is where Saul gives David one of his daughters as his wife (David acquires several others, too!), in the hopes he'll have something to use against his new son-in-law later. Jonathan tells his pal how much trouble he's in. There's a waiting period of three days (like Jesus) while things build to a head. David finds himself with the upper hand, which impresses on Saul the nobility of this youth he has become so jealous of. He quits trying to kill him.
Samuel dies, his role complete. David's second bride is like one of those encounters Jesus has in the New Testament, but in a thoroughly Old Testament manner. Saul uses a medium to contact the dead Samuel. The ban against mediums, wizards, etc. (abominations to God, or so say the books of Moses several times) seems to have been lifted, or the Hebrews simply don't care about that edict anymore. (They're not exactly flawless these days.)
Jonathan falls in battle with the Philistines. Saul opts for suicide rather than meeting a similar fate. End of First Book.
Anyway, Saul is very much a warrior king. Samuel may have a different or perhaps only from a certain point of view version of biblical history, when he states "Jacob went into Egypt," where it was clearly Joseph his son who made the family mark there, as clearly stated in Genesis and the start of Exodus. He goes on with further summarizing, which either I wasn't reading closely enough or doesn't exactly follow the Judges record of the judges era, or at least vastly condenses it (no mention of Samson, for instance, who has come to dominate the modern view of that time).
First Samuel doesn't seem so keen on the need for a Hebrew king, that it's kind of a sign of weakness. May be another foreshadow of how the New Testament develops.
Saul's reign lasts for 2 years. It's festooned with Philistine conflict. Those darn Philistines! Samuel is a little like Moses in interpreting what God thinks of certain circumstances. He's displeased with how Saul conducts himself after a battle, thinks it has something to do with hubris. Saul's son Jonathan, as with the remainder of the book, serves as a counterpoint to Saul himself. When one is presented as generally good, the other is presented as generally bad.
Saul's whole family is laid out, the way genealogies were done in previous books. This may be the difference in how long ago the events being recorded took place. His big offense has something to do with preferring sacrifice over obedience. In the numerous laws of Moses, sacrifice was essential to just about everything. That was only a few books ago. Times change. Please take note, religious observers.
Jesse shows up again. He's not really important. It's his offspring, and specifically David, that we really care about. From here, you will start to know a lot of this. Samuel anoints David, the new more perfect chosen one. It's interesting how Saul and David initially interact. Saul calls for some help dealing with what's described as an evil spirit from God (certainly an interesting twist if it's the same as later and more famous demonic possession) but what I'll call foul moods. David is called upon to soothe his lord, a sacred cord no doubt (alleluia!), playing a lyre whenever Saul needs it. Saul is pleased. He thinks very favorably of young David, at first.
The Philistines return for more trouble! Goliath! The valley of Elah looms!
Jesse's sheep are kept in Bethlehem. New Testament looms!
It's interesting that David's brother describes him as presumptuous and having evil in his heart. Maybe it's jealousy. Maybe it's a peek at David's true personality?
Speaking of New Testament looming, David is a "good shepherd," delivered by God from the clutches of predators. It's impossible that in the midst of all the interpreting of scripture he did, Jesus or his friends wouldn't have noted any of this.
David's weapon isn't so much the slingshot as his faith in God. Goliath falls. Head served on a platter, another odd little echo to be found in the New Testament with John the Baptist.
Jonathan's stock is rising as he becomes fast friends with David. Saul starts thinking more craftily as he begins his pursuit of David. He becomes a lot more like Samson. This is where Saul gives David one of his daughters as his wife (David acquires several others, too!), in the hopes he'll have something to use against his new son-in-law later. Jonathan tells his pal how much trouble he's in. There's a waiting period of three days (like Jesus) while things build to a head. David finds himself with the upper hand, which impresses on Saul the nobility of this youth he has become so jealous of. He quits trying to kill him.
Samuel dies, his role complete. David's second bride is like one of those encounters Jesus has in the New Testament, but in a thoroughly Old Testament manner. Saul uses a medium to contact the dead Samuel. The ban against mediums, wizards, etc. (abominations to God, or so say the books of Moses several times) seems to have been lifted, or the Hebrews simply don't care about that edict anymore. (They're not exactly flawless these days.)
Jonathan falls in battle with the Philistines. Saul opts for suicide rather than meeting a similar fate. End of First Book.
Tuesday, December 17, 2013
Judges 16-21, Book of Ruth 1-4, First Book of Samuel 1-10
Judges picks up again with the familiar conclusion of the Samson affair, the challenges of Delilah, the lost hair and strength, and the two pillars he still manages to bring down on top of a vast assembly of Philistines.
Wouldn't it be nice if that were the last of the Philistines, or the last heroic judge the Hebrews needed? Except Samson seemed to spend all his time doing very much his own thing. His story is a little bit about hubris and personal redemption more than anything directly concerned with Jewish history or faith.
The next judge is Micah, who leads all of Israel, basically, into idolatry, so he's not a very good one at all. Bethlehem is mentioned. The Hebrews fall into some of their worst habits. There's a terrible story about a concubine who's raped all night and then chopped into bits.
However, it's fun on a purely Jewish cultural note when the phrase "such a thing" at the start of a sentence appears. Apparently it has long roots!
And then they all further degenerate into inter-tribal warfare, and thus ends Judges.
The first incredibly short book of the Bible, the Book of Ruth, comes next, and it's set during the time of the judges. It's very much a story about the Jewish faith being kept alive despite the troubled times, by a widow and her daughter-in-law, Ruth, who is rewarded by winning a husband, which results in the birth of Obid, who becomes the father of Jesse, who becomes the father of David. At this point in the beginnings of the Bible, we have what previously could very easily have been included in a larger book, but clearly the books have already begun to be codified. Ruth's story is intended to fill in a gap that would otherwise have existed, and explain that not all Jews were behaving badly in those times.
The phrase, "the Lord be with you," appears, which later generations of the faithful will certainly recognize.
The First Book of Samuel begins and we find ourselves in familiar echoing material. Hannah's journey to motherhood would certainly have sounded familiar to those familiar with Genesis and how Rebekah and Isaac ended up conceiving their children Jacob and Esau. It also evokes Abraham and Sarah, Jacob himself with Rachel, and the New Testament's Mary and Elizabeth. Hannah is the mother of Samuel, by the way.
Hannah's prayer reads a lot like a revised statement of faith in God, now that the relationship between Israel and the Lord has altered since the time of Moses and other such generations. It's a lot more relaxed, and familiar to our own times, another touchstone in the development of everything we know and believe now. It includes the phrase, "the pillars of the earth," as well as "not by might shall a man prevail," which is rank contradiction to the time of Moses and Joshua, when I saw all that blatant conquering going on. It represents another clear theological shift. One might say that the Jews had begun to distance themselves from the idea that it was God telling them to fight so much.
Eli, who previously appears as Hannah's religious confessor, becomes Samuel's mentor, including the famous moment where Samuel is confused when God begins speaking with him, confusing the Lord for his mentor. Hey, at this point it was increasingly rare to be granted an audience with the Almighty.
It's stated that "the boy Samuel continued to grow both in stature and in favor with the Lord and with men," which the gospels later evoke with Jesus. There's a clear connection between the New Testament and the emerging story of David, and that should come as no surprise.
There's a little summary and a little prophecy, by now standard biblical material. Samuel is the first person in the Bible since Abraham to speak with God so freely.
The Philistines! The Hebrew tribes, in their compromised state, do battle with their perennial foes, and make a curious decision on the battlefield. They elect to use the ark of the covenant as a means of intimidation. The ark has taken on perhaps a different kind of meaning at this point in history, not so much a symbol of faith and the accord with God, but a totem of power. The Philistines are suitably impressed (though they seem to believe it represents not God but many Hebrew gods, which wouldn't be far from the mark, and shows just how far the chosen people had fallen). They end up stealing it!
Eli dies from the shock of learning this. He lasted as a judge for 40 years. The ark causes the Philistines a lot of trouble. They decide it would be a better idea to negotiate it back into the hands of Israel, and so that actually happens, which also has the effect of proving the Philistines aren't always so bad.
Like the later Egyptian pyramids and those who sought to loot them, the returned ark proves a cursed curiosity to some of the happy Hebrews. They open it. God smites them. Raiders of the lost ark.
Twenty years pass. God tells Samuel about the future Hebrew king, and he accurately describes the coming reign of Saul. Saul is then introduced. He's described as the most handsome man in all the land, which funny enough evokes his successor David (and Snow White). All in all, Saul comes off well in his younger years. He's even a prophet. Samuel anoints him, he becomes king. He might even be described as a sort of John the Baptist figure, or maybe he fights for that role with Samuel. Either way, David is coming...
Wouldn't it be nice if that were the last of the Philistines, or the last heroic judge the Hebrews needed? Except Samson seemed to spend all his time doing very much his own thing. His story is a little bit about hubris and personal redemption more than anything directly concerned with Jewish history or faith.
The next judge is Micah, who leads all of Israel, basically, into idolatry, so he's not a very good one at all. Bethlehem is mentioned. The Hebrews fall into some of their worst habits. There's a terrible story about a concubine who's raped all night and then chopped into bits.
However, it's fun on a purely Jewish cultural note when the phrase "such a thing" at the start of a sentence appears. Apparently it has long roots!
And then they all further degenerate into inter-tribal warfare, and thus ends Judges.
The first incredibly short book of the Bible, the Book of Ruth, comes next, and it's set during the time of the judges. It's very much a story about the Jewish faith being kept alive despite the troubled times, by a widow and her daughter-in-law, Ruth, who is rewarded by winning a husband, which results in the birth of Obid, who becomes the father of Jesse, who becomes the father of David. At this point in the beginnings of the Bible, we have what previously could very easily have been included in a larger book, but clearly the books have already begun to be codified. Ruth's story is intended to fill in a gap that would otherwise have existed, and explain that not all Jews were behaving badly in those times.
The phrase, "the Lord be with you," appears, which later generations of the faithful will certainly recognize.
The First Book of Samuel begins and we find ourselves in familiar echoing material. Hannah's journey to motherhood would certainly have sounded familiar to those familiar with Genesis and how Rebekah and Isaac ended up conceiving their children Jacob and Esau. It also evokes Abraham and Sarah, Jacob himself with Rachel, and the New Testament's Mary and Elizabeth. Hannah is the mother of Samuel, by the way.
Hannah's prayer reads a lot like a revised statement of faith in God, now that the relationship between Israel and the Lord has altered since the time of Moses and other such generations. It's a lot more relaxed, and familiar to our own times, another touchstone in the development of everything we know and believe now. It includes the phrase, "the pillars of the earth," as well as "not by might shall a man prevail," which is rank contradiction to the time of Moses and Joshua, when I saw all that blatant conquering going on. It represents another clear theological shift. One might say that the Jews had begun to distance themselves from the idea that it was God telling them to fight so much.
Eli, who previously appears as Hannah's religious confessor, becomes Samuel's mentor, including the famous moment where Samuel is confused when God begins speaking with him, confusing the Lord for his mentor. Hey, at this point it was increasingly rare to be granted an audience with the Almighty.
It's stated that "the boy Samuel continued to grow both in stature and in favor with the Lord and with men," which the gospels later evoke with Jesus. There's a clear connection between the New Testament and the emerging story of David, and that should come as no surprise.
There's a little summary and a little prophecy, by now standard biblical material. Samuel is the first person in the Bible since Abraham to speak with God so freely.
The Philistines! The Hebrew tribes, in their compromised state, do battle with their perennial foes, and make a curious decision on the battlefield. They elect to use the ark of the covenant as a means of intimidation. The ark has taken on perhaps a different kind of meaning at this point in history, not so much a symbol of faith and the accord with God, but a totem of power. The Philistines are suitably impressed (though they seem to believe it represents not God but many Hebrew gods, which wouldn't be far from the mark, and shows just how far the chosen people had fallen). They end up stealing it!
Eli dies from the shock of learning this. He lasted as a judge for 40 years. The ark causes the Philistines a lot of trouble. They decide it would be a better idea to negotiate it back into the hands of Israel, and so that actually happens, which also has the effect of proving the Philistines aren't always so bad.
Like the later Egyptian pyramids and those who sought to loot them, the returned ark proves a cursed curiosity to some of the happy Hebrews. They open it. God smites them. Raiders of the lost ark.
Twenty years pass. God tells Samuel about the future Hebrew king, and he accurately describes the coming reign of Saul. Saul is then introduced. He's described as the most handsome man in all the land, which funny enough evokes his successor David (and Snow White). All in all, Saul comes off well in his younger years. He's even a prophet. Samuel anoints him, he becomes king. He might even be described as a sort of John the Baptist figure, or maybe he fights for that role with Samuel. Either way, David is coming...
Saturday, December 14, 2013
Book of Joshua 16-24, Judges 1-15
The Book of Joshua picks back up with the splitting of territories. Riveting stuff.
I meant to make this reference before, but there's a strong feeling that Book of Joshua inspired a lot of Revelation's imagery, with its emphasis on the number seven and the appearance of Megiddo, which is the source of the word "Armageddon." Megiddo was a real place, where the apocalyptic battle was supposed to take place. And as I've stated before, there is plenty of fighting in the chronicles of Moses and Joshua..
Shiloh appears. I found this remarkable mostly as an extremely amateur American Civil War buff.
"Thus the Lord gave to Israel all the land he swore to give their fathers." This line kind of makes the original Abrahamic covenant sound complete, but of course the whole relationship between God and the Hebrews became very much ongoing, as long as those Hebrews quit being so rebellious...Which doesn't happen very soon. Just as I was making a note that they were behaving themselves, they stopped that right away. God gets pretty hot under the collar when they build an altar intended for a purpose other than worshiping him, although Phinehas appears again to explain that it is a communal phenomenon that will help unite them in their common devotion to their Lord. This appeases him. No smiting. Phinehas is the go-to guy when you don't need to know too much about the guy saving the Hebrews' butt.
Joshua in his farewell address summarizes the line of Abraham, skipping just like Exodus to Moses at that point in the history. Apparently there was just no one worth talking about, or their names were completely forgotten. Balaam is described as intending to curse rather than bless Israel, and I still hate reading this kind of stuff. He seems to have come from a separate tradition that was folded into the Moses narrative without anyone realizing it, and only the orthodox view based on his final fate survived full tradition. In the address Joshua utters the phrase, "as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord," which you will surely find familiar.
I know I've tried to guess how many generations passed from the time of Joshua to when his story was codified in this chronicle, possibly the first record completed, and I conclude by suggesting that perhaps it was as few as two, as the concluding passages in the book might be interpreted to say.
Judges is very similar to Joshua and may stem from an equally early recording tradition. More summary can be found here, of the conquests the Hebrews were so fond of performing. Caleb is mentioned here. Everything sounds perfectly fine, and then they start making concessions, and that seems to be where things fall apart. As living memory of the founding fathers fades away, the people stray from God. So he gives them a series of periodic champions, or judges, to try and put them back in order.
The first judge is named Othniel, and he is the son of Caleb's brother. The second is Ehud, who has the first of the extended episodes, in which he personally slays the king of an enemy nation. The king is extremely fat, and Ehud has to plunge his sword deep into the king's belly. Shamgar operates against the Philistines, who are quickly approaching their most famous biblical hours. Then there's Deborah, who is described as a prophetess but is clearly a judge. The highlight of her episode is a a pretty good poem.
The first truly big name among the judges appears next, and it's Gideon. He frequently has God, or the angel representing him, prove they are who they say they are, which makes him far more brazen than past figures (any of them). He has to contend with worship of that nasty pagan god Baal, whose followers fully expect him to act in their defense as Gideon threatens smiting. In opposite of Abraham, who had to talk God into accepting smaller numbers of worthy individuals to save, Gideon argues that he needs fewer men to lead in battle. Prophetic dreams return to scripture, but not in the guise of Gideon. He engages in spectacular trumpet warfare, probably something you may remember.
The enemy leaders flee from him much as Darius does from Alexander the Great. Unlike Darius, however, these guys are eventually slain by Gideon himself. As soon as Gideon himself dies, the people return to their wicked ways.
One bit of cultural connections is camels wearing the crescent, which remains an Arabic emblem to this day.
Remember the name Abimelech from earlier? Someone else gives it as spin, as king. He is the son of Gideon. He faces the same kind of turmoil as the successors of Alexander, everyone spoiling for control and no one capable of filling Great shoes. Abimelech is no slouch, but he's no Gideon, either. Even with two of them now, I doubt you remember the name at all. But he does leave an echo behind. Like Samson who is to appear shortly, the most famous of the judges, Abimelech finds himself in the position to wipe out a whole mess of his enemies in the midst of one major structural collapse. He ends up dying in battle, although since he's fatally struck by a woman, the chauvinist asks a male colleague to do him in first, because he doesn't want to go out that way.
Maybe that's why no one knows his (or his predecessor's) name...
Then there was Tola who judged for 23 years, then Jair who judged for 22. Syria is mentioned. Philistines come round again. Another interesting lost figure is Jephthah, who was initially rejected as meaningless in the grand scheme, and so he gathers around him other "worthless fellows," only for the lot of them to be recuited, via begging, to help the Hebrews catch a break. He consents. He later goes so far as to massage their ego by explaining in extremely favorable terms the history of their conquests. Jephthah has a tragic ending, however, when he strikes a bargain with God and the payment he comes to regret is sacrificing the first person he sees when he returns home. That person ends up being his own daughter, which begins a tradition when she's allowed to bemoan never having made a life for herself, and then becomes a burnt offering. Which kind of beggars the question of why earlier God had to make such a point of saying this was an abomination pagans practiced.
Anyway, Jephthah in all judged for 6 years. Elom followed for 10, Abdon for 8. The Philistines come round again! And then a man named Manoah receives a visit from the angel of the Lord, who like Abraham before him and later for two lucky ladies in the New Testament, learns that his barren wife will give birth after all. The resulting child's name is Samson. Samson grows up and is a clever guy, wanting a Philistine bride so he can have something to complain about later. His whole career as a judge is recorded at 20 years. David Maine has one of his several exceptions works of fiction based on biblical episodes I've now reached in my readings centered around Samson, called appropriately enough The Book of Samson. Maine also has The Preservationist (concerning Noah) and Fallen (the best of them; featuring Adam, Eve, Abel, and Cain, told in reverse). He doesn't paint Samson in the best of lights, you should know...
I meant to make this reference before, but there's a strong feeling that Book of Joshua inspired a lot of Revelation's imagery, with its emphasis on the number seven and the appearance of Megiddo, which is the source of the word "Armageddon." Megiddo was a real place, where the apocalyptic battle was supposed to take place. And as I've stated before, there is plenty of fighting in the chronicles of Moses and Joshua..
Shiloh appears. I found this remarkable mostly as an extremely amateur American Civil War buff.
"Thus the Lord gave to Israel all the land he swore to give their fathers." This line kind of makes the original Abrahamic covenant sound complete, but of course the whole relationship between God and the Hebrews became very much ongoing, as long as those Hebrews quit being so rebellious...Which doesn't happen very soon. Just as I was making a note that they were behaving themselves, they stopped that right away. God gets pretty hot under the collar when they build an altar intended for a purpose other than worshiping him, although Phinehas appears again to explain that it is a communal phenomenon that will help unite them in their common devotion to their Lord. This appeases him. No smiting. Phinehas is the go-to guy when you don't need to know too much about the guy saving the Hebrews' butt.
Joshua in his farewell address summarizes the line of Abraham, skipping just like Exodus to Moses at that point in the history. Apparently there was just no one worth talking about, or their names were completely forgotten. Balaam is described as intending to curse rather than bless Israel, and I still hate reading this kind of stuff. He seems to have come from a separate tradition that was folded into the Moses narrative without anyone realizing it, and only the orthodox view based on his final fate survived full tradition. In the address Joshua utters the phrase, "as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord," which you will surely find familiar.
I know I've tried to guess how many generations passed from the time of Joshua to when his story was codified in this chronicle, possibly the first record completed, and I conclude by suggesting that perhaps it was as few as two, as the concluding passages in the book might be interpreted to say.
Judges is very similar to Joshua and may stem from an equally early recording tradition. More summary can be found here, of the conquests the Hebrews were so fond of performing. Caleb is mentioned here. Everything sounds perfectly fine, and then they start making concessions, and that seems to be where things fall apart. As living memory of the founding fathers fades away, the people stray from God. So he gives them a series of periodic champions, or judges, to try and put them back in order.
The first judge is named Othniel, and he is the son of Caleb's brother. The second is Ehud, who has the first of the extended episodes, in which he personally slays the king of an enemy nation. The king is extremely fat, and Ehud has to plunge his sword deep into the king's belly. Shamgar operates against the Philistines, who are quickly approaching their most famous biblical hours. Then there's Deborah, who is described as a prophetess but is clearly a judge. The highlight of her episode is a a pretty good poem.
The first truly big name among the judges appears next, and it's Gideon. He frequently has God, or the angel representing him, prove they are who they say they are, which makes him far more brazen than past figures (any of them). He has to contend with worship of that nasty pagan god Baal, whose followers fully expect him to act in their defense as Gideon threatens smiting. In opposite of Abraham, who had to talk God into accepting smaller numbers of worthy individuals to save, Gideon argues that he needs fewer men to lead in battle. Prophetic dreams return to scripture, but not in the guise of Gideon. He engages in spectacular trumpet warfare, probably something you may remember.
The enemy leaders flee from him much as Darius does from Alexander the Great. Unlike Darius, however, these guys are eventually slain by Gideon himself. As soon as Gideon himself dies, the people return to their wicked ways.
One bit of cultural connections is camels wearing the crescent, which remains an Arabic emblem to this day.
Remember the name Abimelech from earlier? Someone else gives it as spin, as king. He is the son of Gideon. He faces the same kind of turmoil as the successors of Alexander, everyone spoiling for control and no one capable of filling Great shoes. Abimelech is no slouch, but he's no Gideon, either. Even with two of them now, I doubt you remember the name at all. But he does leave an echo behind. Like Samson who is to appear shortly, the most famous of the judges, Abimelech finds himself in the position to wipe out a whole mess of his enemies in the midst of one major structural collapse. He ends up dying in battle, although since he's fatally struck by a woman, the chauvinist asks a male colleague to do him in first, because he doesn't want to go out that way.
Maybe that's why no one knows his (or his predecessor's) name...
Then there was Tola who judged for 23 years, then Jair who judged for 22. Syria is mentioned. Philistines come round again. Another interesting lost figure is Jephthah, who was initially rejected as meaningless in the grand scheme, and so he gathers around him other "worthless fellows," only for the lot of them to be recuited, via begging, to help the Hebrews catch a break. He consents. He later goes so far as to massage their ego by explaining in extremely favorable terms the history of their conquests. Jephthah has a tragic ending, however, when he strikes a bargain with God and the payment he comes to regret is sacrificing the first person he sees when he returns home. That person ends up being his own daughter, which begins a tradition when she's allowed to bemoan never having made a life for herself, and then becomes a burnt offering. Which kind of beggars the question of why earlier God had to make such a point of saying this was an abomination pagans practiced.
Anyway, Jephthah in all judged for 6 years. Elom followed for 10, Abdon for 8. The Philistines come round again! And then a man named Manoah receives a visit from the angel of the Lord, who like Abraham before him and later for two lucky ladies in the New Testament, learns that his barren wife will give birth after all. The resulting child's name is Samson. Samson grows up and is a clever guy, wanting a Philistine bride so he can have something to complain about later. His whole career as a judge is recorded at 20 years. David Maine has one of his several exceptions works of fiction based on biblical episodes I've now reached in my readings centered around Samson, called appropriately enough The Book of Samson. Maine also has The Preservationist (concerning Noah) and Fallen (the best of them; featuring Adam, Eve, Abel, and Cain, told in reverse). He doesn't paint Samson in the best of lights, you should know...
Friday, December 13, 2013
Deuteronomy 26-34, Book of Joshua 1-15
I was just wondering, because God goes to great lengths to explain that bad things would only happen to his people if they strayed from him,why it is that Exodus begins by explaining that the bondage in Egypt happened because of a regime change after the time of Joseph. Just something to think about.
Deuteronomy continues the the job of summarizing what has come before, and finally gets around to reintroducing the significance of Joshua, making a heavy case for him. I'll have more on that in a moment.
I'd also like to make mention of the fact that God says the ark of the covenant needs to be plastered. I don't think that was mentioned previously, when God was being incredibly specific about all that.
There's another song that reads like a psalm, with an emphasis on the Rock, which is I think the second time the idea is mooted in the books of Moses. In Christianity, Jesus famously rechristens Simon as Peter because it means the Rock, which he intends to build his church on. Peter is a Joshua figure, by the way.
There's mention that the Hebrews void of counsel may be something of a breach of contract, which may explain what happened to them in Egypt, because that was a significant breach in the Genesis lineage. I've been bringing that up regularly. This may have something to do with explaining what befell Balaam, a prophet who failed to sway a people in the direction of God. God doesn't like that sort of thing.
Moses dies, and Deuteronomy ends by noting that there has been no prophet like him since. There are plenty of other prophets that follow in the Old Testament, but at later times, and of course Christians have Jesus as the new Moses.
The Book of Joshua may be a continuation of Deuteronomy just as Acts is a continuation of the Gospel of Luke. Didn't I say something like that previously? At any rate it's a clear distinction from the way other some of the other books chronicling Moses present themselves. God is still active, but he's not the God who spent all his time building a culture with rules. He's more like the God who believes in war and conquest above all else, which to be fair Moses also experienced, but not quite to this heavy extent.
Another difference in perspective is the phrasing of what happened to the Red Sea after the flight from Egypt. Here it's described as melting, several times. Tradition, and earlier narratives, have it as being parted. There's a clear difference. I stated previously that perhaps the later books of Moses were written sooner than the earlier ones. This difference may be a sign of things not being solidified yet. Who looks to the Book of Joshua for information concerning the flight from Egypt anyway?
It may also be worth noting that there's a city called Adam, and it doesn't reference the first man in the passage at all. Possibly indicates where the name came from, or what it inspired, much as the name Eve is described in Genesis itself as having in itself significance beyond being the name of the first woman. So another indication that Book of Joshua, like Deuteronomy, came first, and Genesis was solidified later, like a Hollywood prequel.
One bit of continuity is the ending of God providing manna. However, no mention of quail, which is far less famous, and perhaps for this very reason. He seemed to provide it for the first time twice anyway.
Another lost heroic woman of the Old Testament is the harlot Rabah, who was a citizen of a Jericho who like Lot was the one good person living there, providing shelter for Joshua's scouts and thus securing her and her family's survival in the most famous conquest of the book (she reads like a preview of women in the New Testament). But there are more. Many more. There was certainly war and conquest elsewhere, but here it's so jubilant and almost the whole point entirely, as if it's the template for what is described in earlier instances. God does tell Joshua how to do it, but again, that's a marked difference between the interactions God has with his chosen representative and all the covenants and social outlines he spent his time reiterating in previous books.
There is a link, however, with the God of Genesis, insofar as Joshua making at least one deal with citizens of a land the Hebrews approach, even though it quickly degenerates into even more war. That's what Abraham was famous for, a little like the Solomon of his day, a wise ruler (except for tricking people into thinking his wife was his sister).
Jerusalem is mentioned for the first time. It is one of five kingdoms that attempt to unite against the Hebrew hoard. Gaza is mentioned, too. God points out the Philistines to the aging Joshua. We met them in Genesis, but things didn't end well then, and they will only get worse later.
As if in confirmation of my observations, the Book of Joshua provides another summaries of Moses' conquests. Here Balaam is mentioned again, this time as a soothsayer. It may be entirely possibly that God's previously inexplicable crusade against the magical kind of all variations is a reaction to other relationships he's tried to make that failed, unlike with Abraham and his descendants. You fail, like Balaam, and you become dead to him, an abomination. He demands success above all else. Obedience is about as important to him as human life in general. He tests and tests, and if you fail, he smites you. The end.
Caleb is finally referenced again! At this point he has become another Esau or Lot, someone whose story has branched off from the main record that is the Bible. It is no doubt very likely that people at that time had a lot more stories. I'm beginning to wish I had access to those, too. I like these lost figures like Balaam and Caleb, who begins to sound, in the Book of Joshua, almost like a classic Greek warrior.
The Jebusites, one of several tribes routinely referenced in the books of Moses as antagonistic to God's wishes for his people, are referenced as occupying Jerusalem "to this day," another indication that the memory as of the composing of this book was probably fairly recent. They also read like the predecessors of today's Palestinians.
Deuteronomy continues the the job of summarizing what has come before, and finally gets around to reintroducing the significance of Joshua, making a heavy case for him. I'll have more on that in a moment.
I'd also like to make mention of the fact that God says the ark of the covenant needs to be plastered. I don't think that was mentioned previously, when God was being incredibly specific about all that.
There's another song that reads like a psalm, with an emphasis on the Rock, which is I think the second time the idea is mooted in the books of Moses. In Christianity, Jesus famously rechristens Simon as Peter because it means the Rock, which he intends to build his church on. Peter is a Joshua figure, by the way.
There's mention that the Hebrews void of counsel may be something of a breach of contract, which may explain what happened to them in Egypt, because that was a significant breach in the Genesis lineage. I've been bringing that up regularly. This may have something to do with explaining what befell Balaam, a prophet who failed to sway a people in the direction of God. God doesn't like that sort of thing.
Moses dies, and Deuteronomy ends by noting that there has been no prophet like him since. There are plenty of other prophets that follow in the Old Testament, but at later times, and of course Christians have Jesus as the new Moses.
The Book of Joshua may be a continuation of Deuteronomy just as Acts is a continuation of the Gospel of Luke. Didn't I say something like that previously? At any rate it's a clear distinction from the way other some of the other books chronicling Moses present themselves. God is still active, but he's not the God who spent all his time building a culture with rules. He's more like the God who believes in war and conquest above all else, which to be fair Moses also experienced, but not quite to this heavy extent.
Another difference in perspective is the phrasing of what happened to the Red Sea after the flight from Egypt. Here it's described as melting, several times. Tradition, and earlier narratives, have it as being parted. There's a clear difference. I stated previously that perhaps the later books of Moses were written sooner than the earlier ones. This difference may be a sign of things not being solidified yet. Who looks to the Book of Joshua for information concerning the flight from Egypt anyway?
It may also be worth noting that there's a city called Adam, and it doesn't reference the first man in the passage at all. Possibly indicates where the name came from, or what it inspired, much as the name Eve is described in Genesis itself as having in itself significance beyond being the name of the first woman. So another indication that Book of Joshua, like Deuteronomy, came first, and Genesis was solidified later, like a Hollywood prequel.
One bit of continuity is the ending of God providing manna. However, no mention of quail, which is far less famous, and perhaps for this very reason. He seemed to provide it for the first time twice anyway.
Another lost heroic woman of the Old Testament is the harlot Rabah, who was a citizen of a Jericho who like Lot was the one good person living there, providing shelter for Joshua's scouts and thus securing her and her family's survival in the most famous conquest of the book (she reads like a preview of women in the New Testament). But there are more. Many more. There was certainly war and conquest elsewhere, but here it's so jubilant and almost the whole point entirely, as if it's the template for what is described in earlier instances. God does tell Joshua how to do it, but again, that's a marked difference between the interactions God has with his chosen representative and all the covenants and social outlines he spent his time reiterating in previous books.
There is a link, however, with the God of Genesis, insofar as Joshua making at least one deal with citizens of a land the Hebrews approach, even though it quickly degenerates into even more war. That's what Abraham was famous for, a little like the Solomon of his day, a wise ruler (except for tricking people into thinking his wife was his sister).
Jerusalem is mentioned for the first time. It is one of five kingdoms that attempt to unite against the Hebrew hoard. Gaza is mentioned, too. God points out the Philistines to the aging Joshua. We met them in Genesis, but things didn't end well then, and they will only get worse later.
As if in confirmation of my observations, the Book of Joshua provides another summaries of Moses' conquests. Here Balaam is mentioned again, this time as a soothsayer. It may be entirely possibly that God's previously inexplicable crusade against the magical kind of all variations is a reaction to other relationships he's tried to make that failed, unlike with Abraham and his descendants. You fail, like Balaam, and you become dead to him, an abomination. He demands success above all else. Obedience is about as important to him as human life in general. He tests and tests, and if you fail, he smites you. The end.
Caleb is finally referenced again! At this point he has become another Esau or Lot, someone whose story has branched off from the main record that is the Bible. It is no doubt very likely that people at that time had a lot more stories. I'm beginning to wish I had access to those, too. I like these lost figures like Balaam and Caleb, who begins to sound, in the Book of Joshua, almost like a classic Greek warrior.
The Jebusites, one of several tribes routinely referenced in the books of Moses as antagonistic to God's wishes for his people, are referenced as occupying Jerusalem "to this day," another indication that the memory as of the composing of this book was probably fairly recent. They also read like the predecessors of today's Palestinians.
Thursday, December 12, 2013
Deuteronomy 6-25
Sometimes as I'm reading it seems the later books of Moses may have actually been written first. I know I've already suggested that Exodus itself predated Genesis, and keeping in mind I'm not approaching this from a scholar's perspective. These are the impressions I get from reading through the Bible. Another observation is that these books of Moses may be comparable to the gospels of the New Testament, perhaps one or more of them independently composed (there may be a case to be made of a link between Exodus and Leviticus, like Luke and Acts).
Deuteronomy, meanwhile, makes strong Christian waves the further I read into it. "Man does not live on bread alone," which is something Jesus says in Matthew, pops up. Again, Christians seem concerned mostly with the big stories from the Old Testament, and then the later prophets, but there's a ton of material in the early books as well. Deuteronomy is also where love is first referenced in relation to God, and of course that was another of Jesus's favorite edicts.
Another interesting phrase that has nothing to do with Christianity is, "since I am not speaking to your children who have not known or seen it," which is Moses speaking for God, very strongly suggesting the time in which the Moses chronicles began to be solidified out of oral tradition as being very much removed from the Moses experience itself, where there would be far less direct contact with God, when there was clearly plenty of it in the early books. This is the first mark of distinction between the traditions the Moses books are meant to introduce and those who are later living them. A lot of the talk about how God claims several generations (at least; because he proclaims as many as ten sometimes) are not allowed to come back into the faith for various offenses or statuses may also indicate how long from the origin point the stories become codified, because the contemporaries of the record will know exactly how long certain families have been excluded from the community.
And yes, I will go on record suggesting that there was a fair bit of interpreting and not strictly experienced material in these books. The term "divinely inspired" is kicked around a lot by those who want you to believe everything, but even those who make that effort could not possibly translate what are clearly things relevant only to a specific and very much in the past living condition. You should not read the Bible as if you need to take everything as if it really was and always will be that way. Because you will probably not be a believer on the other side of the experience. It's not a surprise that for a long time the actual reading of scripture was kept to a minimum, even considering basic literacy levels. There's only so much interpreting that can be done. You need to be able to think critically. The material that has been included (and there are certain books that aren't in every version although I will be covering some of this apocrypha because it's in mine, and I love me some Tobit) has the greatest amount of religious significance. By the time anyone realized how much duplicated material existed in the books of Moses, it was probably too late, the same way the gospels present similar biographies for Jesus but material that appears in one or two but not all of them. Anyway, there's always the chance I will be smited, and so be considered officially sacrilegious. But even material of this kind can be lost in the boundless sea that is the internet. Even though it's apparently incredibly rare to actually read the whole Bible and notice these things, there's a very small chance someone else will stumble upon these thoughts and actually care.
The concept of a Hebrew king is referenced for the first time.
God seems to have remarked on a lot of cultures where the offspring are burned as part of a sacrificial offering. I find this incredibly frightening.
God also doesn't take kindly to the magical arts. I figure it's because of competition to miracles and such. This comes up every now and then, although this is the first time it's gone into with any depth. Normally it was just "they must be smited. the end." He then codifies the tradition of prophecy, and even warns against false prophets. It seems to be implied that the work of prophets can probably be confirmed in a lifetime, something both Jews and Christians have a hard time considering. Both are institutions that become as much a culture as a faith as time goes on.
The institution of the three path rule is pretty interesting, three cities on the outskirts of every settlement so that those guilty of accidental murder have a place to flee to (so those pursuing them can't guess right away where they went). Although this is one of the ways where justice has a chance to flourish, God still seems to have a lot of reasons people need to be executed, mostly by stoning. God, I ask, or Moses? It's probably easy to assume the one goes hand-in-hand with the other, but that may not be necessarily so. A little later, Moses talks about divorce, which Jesus specifically contradicts, saying Moses gave this rule as an appeasement to the people of his time. There is also a contradiction in Deuteronomy to something said in an earlier book (I'm giving you homework to discover where and/or to confirm that I'm not misremembering) about the ability of a man to marry his brother's widow. I'm pretty sure that it was stated previously that this is wrong, but here Moses says it's okay, that it preserves a family line already begun. Family lines were incredibly important in Genesis, but not as much in the books of Moses, except to discuss the descendants of the twelve sons of Jacob, or in other words the twelve tribes. Moses himself is descended from Levi, who was previously not significant in a positive way, and all Levites are made the first priestly class.
Finally, it's made official that usury is okay as long as it's with gentiles. So that ensures Jews never have problems with their neighbors again!
Did I say "finally"? Not really! Because poor Balaam is referenced again, completely ignoring a whole narrative that paints him in incredibly honorable light and condemning him for Moses' misconception that results in an ignominious death. Thus begins the full burial job that Revelation later echoes. This may be another sign that the folks putting the Bible together either just didn't realize the Balaam narrative was there or didn't care to eliminate it. Or perhaps to suggest Moses' imperfection. But that still leaves the rest of us, because no one ever talks about Balaam, and certainly not as a wise prophet who greatly helped the exiled Hebrews. If you want to remember the guy himself, please keep that in mind. A forgotten hero of the faith.
Deuteronomy, meanwhile, makes strong Christian waves the further I read into it. "Man does not live on bread alone," which is something Jesus says in Matthew, pops up. Again, Christians seem concerned mostly with the big stories from the Old Testament, and then the later prophets, but there's a ton of material in the early books as well. Deuteronomy is also where love is first referenced in relation to God, and of course that was another of Jesus's favorite edicts.
Another interesting phrase that has nothing to do with Christianity is, "since I am not speaking to your children who have not known or seen it," which is Moses speaking for God, very strongly suggesting the time in which the Moses chronicles began to be solidified out of oral tradition as being very much removed from the Moses experience itself, where there would be far less direct contact with God, when there was clearly plenty of it in the early books. This is the first mark of distinction between the traditions the Moses books are meant to introduce and those who are later living them. A lot of the talk about how God claims several generations (at least; because he proclaims as many as ten sometimes) are not allowed to come back into the faith for various offenses or statuses may also indicate how long from the origin point the stories become codified, because the contemporaries of the record will know exactly how long certain families have been excluded from the community.
And yes, I will go on record suggesting that there was a fair bit of interpreting and not strictly experienced material in these books. The term "divinely inspired" is kicked around a lot by those who want you to believe everything, but even those who make that effort could not possibly translate what are clearly things relevant only to a specific and very much in the past living condition. You should not read the Bible as if you need to take everything as if it really was and always will be that way. Because you will probably not be a believer on the other side of the experience. It's not a surprise that for a long time the actual reading of scripture was kept to a minimum, even considering basic literacy levels. There's only so much interpreting that can be done. You need to be able to think critically. The material that has been included (and there are certain books that aren't in every version although I will be covering some of this apocrypha because it's in mine, and I love me some Tobit) has the greatest amount of religious significance. By the time anyone realized how much duplicated material existed in the books of Moses, it was probably too late, the same way the gospels present similar biographies for Jesus but material that appears in one or two but not all of them. Anyway, there's always the chance I will be smited, and so be considered officially sacrilegious. But even material of this kind can be lost in the boundless sea that is the internet. Even though it's apparently incredibly rare to actually read the whole Bible and notice these things, there's a very small chance someone else will stumble upon these thoughts and actually care.
The concept of a Hebrew king is referenced for the first time.
God seems to have remarked on a lot of cultures where the offspring are burned as part of a sacrificial offering. I find this incredibly frightening.
God also doesn't take kindly to the magical arts. I figure it's because of competition to miracles and such. This comes up every now and then, although this is the first time it's gone into with any depth. Normally it was just "they must be smited. the end." He then codifies the tradition of prophecy, and even warns against false prophets. It seems to be implied that the work of prophets can probably be confirmed in a lifetime, something both Jews and Christians have a hard time considering. Both are institutions that become as much a culture as a faith as time goes on.
The institution of the three path rule is pretty interesting, three cities on the outskirts of every settlement so that those guilty of accidental murder have a place to flee to (so those pursuing them can't guess right away where they went). Although this is one of the ways where justice has a chance to flourish, God still seems to have a lot of reasons people need to be executed, mostly by stoning. God, I ask, or Moses? It's probably easy to assume the one goes hand-in-hand with the other, but that may not be necessarily so. A little later, Moses talks about divorce, which Jesus specifically contradicts, saying Moses gave this rule as an appeasement to the people of his time. There is also a contradiction in Deuteronomy to something said in an earlier book (I'm giving you homework to discover where and/or to confirm that I'm not misremembering) about the ability of a man to marry his brother's widow. I'm pretty sure that it was stated previously that this is wrong, but here Moses says it's okay, that it preserves a family line already begun. Family lines were incredibly important in Genesis, but not as much in the books of Moses, except to discuss the descendants of the twelve sons of Jacob, or in other words the twelve tribes. Moses himself is descended from Levi, who was previously not significant in a positive way, and all Levites are made the first priestly class.
Finally, it's made official that usury is okay as long as it's with gentiles. So that ensures Jews never have problems with their neighbors again!
Did I say "finally"? Not really! Because poor Balaam is referenced again, completely ignoring a whole narrative that paints him in incredibly honorable light and condemning him for Moses' misconception that results in an ignominious death. Thus begins the full burial job that Revelation later echoes. This may be another sign that the folks putting the Bible together either just didn't realize the Balaam narrative was there or didn't care to eliminate it. Or perhaps to suggest Moses' imperfection. But that still leaves the rest of us, because no one ever talks about Balaam, and certainly not as a wise prophet who greatly helped the exiled Hebrews. If you want to remember the guy himself, please keep that in mind. A forgotten hero of the faith.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)